telecom@ucbvax.ARPA (10/04/84)
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC>
TELECOM Digest Thursday, 4 Oct 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 95
Today's Topics:
submission from net.general
1+?
Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94
MIT Communications Forum
Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 84 18:35:28 EDT
From: Jon Solomon <jsol@bbncca.ARPA>
Subject: submission from net.general
The issue which bothered me the most of the three I posted was the one
dealing with charges for data transmission over phone lines.
Apparently, just for modems to work correctly, the central office has
to sense when a carrier is on the line and do something special to
make sure it isn't inadvertently clipped or interrupted during the
data conversation.
So there is technology available to detect when someone is using a
modem on a telephone line, and presumably this technology could be
connected to the time & charges apparatus in the central office. The
result would be that if you use your line for voice, one set of
charges apply, and if you use it for data, another set might apply.
This mechanism is rather crude though since I does not keep track of
the amount of bits being communicated. The new all-digital telephone
systems will do this and charge by the bit for use of a special
digital data channel paired with a quality voice line (which is fairer
for us slow terminal hackers). Some of this stuff is going into
medium-scale testing soon. (There was an article about a large
experimental Japanese digital telephone system in IEEE Spectrum a few
months ago. There was another article about internation datacomm wars
more recently.)
Since I know there are hundreds of telecomm engineers outs there, I
sincerely invite corrections and further enlightenment. I was very
disappointed that I did not get a single response on this particular
issue. Please don't leave me disappointed any longer! (I don't read
any of the comm newsgroups anymore, so followup or direct reply will
have to do.)
Joe Falcone Eastern Research Laboratory decwrl! Digital Equipment
Corporation decvax!deccra!jrf Hudson, Massachusetts tardis!
------------------------------
Date: 2 Oct 1984 17:29 MDT (Tue)
From: "Frank J. Wancho" <WANCHO@SIMTEL20>
Subject: 1+?
According to one of those radio news tidbits, some motels in southern
Cal have been burned because PacTel REMOVED the requirement for 1+ for
calls made within the area code. It seems callers were using 9+ with
no accounting instead of 8+. Now, not only will the motel owners be
stuck for the unbillable calls, but will also have to bear the expense
of installing new equipment that supposedly detects and refuses a
non-local 9+ call...
--Frank
------------------------------
Date: Tue 2 Oct 84 16:53:28-PDT
From: Chris <Pace@USC-ECLC.ARPA>
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94
Two items:
I have ITTs answering machine and it works without a remote
unit. You set up a code via dip switches under the machine and then
talk in the right sequence to activate. You can erase all the
messages you heard or keep them for playback later - your choice. It
is about 4 years old, so there is probably something even better out
now.
The second pertains to the problem with pranksters. Answering
machines are great! Every so often some bozo decides that it's fun to
make me answer the phone; I just turn the answering machine on. It is
very despiriting to pranksters and if its someone I really want to
talk to, I can hear it in time to pick it up (has a speaker so you
dont even have to get up).
Chris.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 84 07:54 EDT
From: Kahin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: MIT Communications Forum
The seminar by David Clark, "The MIT Communications Problem" has been
postponed to October 25 (originally October 11). Same time, same
place.
------------------------------
From: ihnp4!ihuxk!rs55611@Berkeley
Date: 3 Oct 84 11:52:27 CDT (Wed)
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #94
A couple of ways to discourage prank calls, assuming they're pranks,
and not malicious:
1. When you think someone is on the line (giggling, breathing, etc.)
try to hurt their ears a little. Blowing a whistle real loud
into your mouthpiece works pretty well, assuming you're not on
a digital (ie PCM) central office where your whistle signal will
get clipped at +3 dBm anyway. Even if clipping does occur,
it will be pretty annoying to the prank caller. If you don't
have a whistle, give them a shot of Touch-Tone!
2. Whisper, but loud enough for them to hear (as if you were talking
to
someone else in the room with you), "Quick, turn on the tracing
circuit!", or words to that effect. Who cares whether this is
technically plausible, the person on the other end is probably
going
to hang up quickly!
Bob Schleicher ihuxk!rs55611
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
*********************