telecom@ucbvax.ARPA (09/06/84)
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@MIT-MC>
TELECOM Digest Thursday, 6 Sep 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 80
Today's Topics:
A bug or a feature?
More on alternate carriers
Hardware info
Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #79
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 84 20:43:21 PDT
From: "Theodore N. Vail" <vail@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: A bug or a feature?
General Telephone has just replaced it's old step-by-step switch
serving the Malibu exchange (213-456-xxxx) with a new electronic
switch. I believe that the press releases announcing the switch to
the new switch called it an EAX-5.
I have two lines served by the new switch and I just discovered the
following (which works on both lines):
If I dial my own number, I don't get a busy signal, instead I get a
soft "beep" every two seconds. This lasts for 6 beeps. If I hang up
before the last beep, then the phone rings; when picked up it gives 5
more "beeps", again one every two seconds. After that the line
becomes quiet, but sidetone remains (so that you can talk between two
extensions). If I hang up after the last beep, the phone doesn't ring
and when picked up gives a dial-tone. Is this an unannounced
"intercom" feature?
On the other hand, if I simply leave the phone off the hook, then,
after 20 seconds, dial tone goes away; a ringing signal occurs and
within another 10 seconds I receive the following recording in a male
voice: "The alloted time for you to dial has been exceeded, please
hang up and dial again. This is a recording."
After playing the recording 4 times, the line becomes quiet and then
after about 10 seconds a strange tone (not a dial tone is heard).
After about 10 seconds it changes frequency. Then after another 10
seconds a "nasty" chirp occurs at a rate of 2 chirps per second.
After about 20 seconds this goes away and once again the line is
quiet.
ted
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 84 13:48:41 EDT
From: Brint <abc@BRL-TGR.ARPA>
Subject: More on alternate carriers
It seems quite likely that the reason for the alleged poor quality of
MCI, Sprint, and others stems not from deficiencies in their own
equipment but in the interconnect provided by the local phone company
whose loyalty may still be to AT&T (who got there first and,
therefore, got the better connections).
------------------------------
Date: 5 Sep 1984 11:04 PDT (Wed)
Sender: TLI@USC-ECLB
From: Tony Li <Tli@Usc-Eclb>
Reply-to: Tli@Usc-Eclb
Subject: Hardware info
Hi all,
I'm looking for something rather different. I hope you can help. A
friend of mine is moving overseas to a location where phone service to
a new residence takes approximately 1-2 years to install.
Fortunately, there is a line 2-3 miles away that is already installed
that he can use. What I guess I'm looking for then is a phone which
has a range of 2-3 miles, the base station is not the receiver, and
preferably can be wired for 220. Price is no object.
Thanks in advance, Tony ;-) <Tli@Usc-Ecl>
------------------------------
Date: 5 Sep 84 16:30:03 PDT (Wednesday)
From: Kluger.PA@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #79
Today, the telephony expert at my site gave me the bad news about AT&T
installation of a transcon (Palo Alto, CA to Rochester, NY) 56K bps
data line. Leadtime of 4 or more months!
My question: have you had any experience with 56K bps leased line
service from any of AT&T's competition? How does the leadtime, cost,
quality of service, technical ability, etc compare with AT&T? What was
used for the last mile, Digital Termination, DDS from local telco,
etc?
Thanks,
Larry Kluger <Kluger@Xerox.ARPA>
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
*********************