Telecom-Request%usc-eclc@brl-bmd.UUCP (Telecom-Request@usc-eclc) (10/25/83)
TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 25 Oct 1983 Volume 3 : Issue 83
Today's Topics:
RE: self-ringing
MCI Mail
MCI Mail
Modem Quality
Ring-Backs
Re: what is...
area code notes, N.E.Md.
Voice message systems
Why is there no command to turn off call waiting?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Oct 1983 20:02:31-PDT
From: Robert P Cunningham <cunningh@Nosc>
Reply-to: cunningh@Nosc
Subject: RE: self-ringing
Another thing to try, that actually works in some areas, occasionally
even with business lines, is to dial your own number. If you get the
message "you're trying to call someone who shares your party line..."
then all you have to do is hang up at that point, and your phone will
ring.
If you get the message, it will work even if you don't have a party
line.
This works on all residential lines, and many business lines in my
state (Hawaii, serviced by Hawaiian Telephone, a GTE company). I'm not
sure why, and I don't know where else it works.
Bob Cunningham Hawaii Institute of Geophysics
------------------------------
Date: 23 Nov 1983 0210-EST
From: John R. Covert <RSX-DEV at DEC-MARLBORO>
Subject: MCI Mail
I, too, finally received my welcome kit.
So far, I'm not terribly impressed; I've expressed some of my concerns
to the mail user "MCIHELP" -- a free address. We'll see what sort of
replies I get back.
Concerns I've reported:
The list of phone numbers does not include the 800 number. I'm not
local to any of the dialups listed. I hope that the 800 number will
remain in service.
I'm concerned about the behaviour of the "delete" key. I'd like them
to accept both "delete" and "control/h", since I am very used to
typing "delete" for corrections. But even if they can't, what they do
when I accidentally type "delete" is bizarre. Control/H DOESN'T WORK
AFTER THAT!
I've asked about the "advanced" category which presumably allows me to
bypass the menus (which I will soon grow tired of). From the
documentation provided, it appears that it may cost extra, because it
MAY (repeat MAY -- the documentation is not clear) be coupled with a
"storage" option which costs $10 per month.
Concerns I've not reported:
Since it is a VMS system, it would be nice for users to be able to use
EDT instead of the rather primitive line oriented editor. I've been
beyond that technology for over ten years.
Also, since it is a VMS system, and since I have a DEC PC-350, I'd
like to be able to use the professional file transfer utility to send
in the text of messages or to retrieve messages sent to me -- this
would eliminate the noise problem (which has often been quite severe
when I've been communicating with them).
MCI lists its obligations to its customers, which seem to be to
deliver mail -- but then says that it is not liable for any loss,
misdelivery, (or apparently anything else) caused even by its own
negligence.
It is also interesting to note that both overnight and four-hour
letters require someone to be there. This is really not surprising,
since MCI is not allowed to drop things into mailboxes. But what
happens if the addressee is out for a few minutes at just the wrong
time?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 83 02:12:18 PDT
From: jmrubin%UCBCORAL.CC@Berkeley (Joel Rubin)
Subject: MCI Mail
It seems to me that one potential question about MCI Mail is just what
it will be able to carry. Obviously, it can't carry a 64K RAM chip or
your grandaunt's knit sweater ("Beam me up, Scotty!") but can it
carry
1) money (as in telegraph money transfers)
2) legal authorization/agreement (at the level of signature or
notarized signature)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 83 01:47:31 EST
From: <ECN.malcolm@PURDUE.ARPA>
Subject: Modem Quality
Has anybody ever seen a comparison of the available 300 and 1200
modems that talks about their error rates? My phone is connected to a
very old and noisey GTE exchange and I am hesitant to just go out and
order any old modem. I have a good Bell 103 modem and never see
errors when dialing into local computers. Can I expect the same with
any of the available 212 modems?
Are there any standards of comparison? I would love to see a graph of
bit-error rate vs the Signal-to-Noise ratio on the line.
Malcolm Slaney
Purdue EE Dept.
{decvax,ucbvax}!pur-ee!malcolm
mgs@purdue
------------------------------
Date: 23 Oct 1983 19:00 EDT (Sun)
From: Paul Fuqua <PF@MIT-XX>
Subject: Ring-Backs
Here's a ring-back method I haven't read yet: when I was a
little kid, "everybody" knew that the way to make the phone ring was
to dial either 44041 or 44011, then hang up. I doubt this method will
work anywhere else, though. The exchanges we used were 214-239 and
214-233, both rather old (23 is AD which stands for Addison, the
location) and without any call-waiting or
-forwarding capabilities (had to switch to 214-661 to get them).
Oddly enough, in that city (Dallas), one dials 1411 for Information,
not 411, and 744-4444 for police/fire/ambulance (744 is the Dallas
city government exchange). Apparently, the cost of changing the
system to allow use of 911, 411, 611 (all the easy numbers of Boston)
is prohibitive.
pf
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 83 7:58:29 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@brl-vld>
Subject: Re: what is...
N=any single digit EXCEPT 0 or 1 X=any single digit INCLUDING 0 and 1
The above is what was intended when I said "N0X". With a few
exceptions, N0X and N1X are used only as area codes, with prefixes
(the next 3 digits after area code) having the form NNX. In the
following areas, prefixes are NXX instead of NNX: 212 New York City
(to be split into 212/718 in 1984) 213 Los Angeles area (to be split
into 213/818 in 1984) 312 Chicago area
"Ease of dialing" refers to the amount of dial-turning necessary if
you are using a ROTARY (not pushbutton) phone. The 3 area codes given
above are the easiest to dial.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 83 9:22:18 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@brl-vld>
Subject: area code notes, N.E.Md.
Oct. 1983 Northeastern Md. call guide shows the 2 splits of the last
12 months: 714/619 in California and 713/409 in Texas. It also has
footnote attached to 212 New York City: "Effective mid-1984 Brooklyn,
Queens and Staten Island 718 Manhattan and the Bronx 212". However,
there is no note about 213/818 split in California, which occurs
before 212/718 split in NYC.
------------------------------
Date: 24 Oct 1983 06:25-PDT
Subject: Voice message systems
From: AFDSC, The Pentagon <Geoffrey C. Mulligan@BRL.ARPA>
Reply-to: geoffm@sri-csl
Does anyone know what companies sell voice message systems?
geoff
------------------------------
Date: 19 Oct 83 22:35:08 PDT (Wed)
From: sun!gnu@Berkeley (John Gilmore)
Subject: Why is there no command to turn off call waiting?
It occurred to me about three seconds after my first "call waiting"
disconnection that the solution is to provide a command that would
turn it off and on from your phone. No big deal, right? Allocate one
more bit and flip it off an on. This was in 1977 and I don't think Ma
Bell has gotten around to thinking of it yet...
(By "command" I mean a tone sequence like the ones you use to set up
speed calling numbers, of course. You could turn it off before
dialing your computer. It would be harder if computers called you,
since you'd be in the middle of receiving the call by the time you
knew you wanted call waiting off. The command could be one-time-only,
too; that way you won't leave your phone in "no call waiting" state
forever.)
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
*********************