Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7) id AA22391; Thu, 15 Dec 88 00:28:33 EST Message-Id: <8812150528.AA22391@bu-cs.BU.EDU> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 88 0:11:47 EST From: The Moderator Reply-To: TELECOM@bu-cs.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #201 To: TELECOM@bu-cs.bu.edu TELECOM Digest Thu, 15 Dec 88 0:11:47 EST Volume 8 : Issue 201 Today's Topics: Re: IBM Sells Rolm To Siemens AG (1) Re: IBM Sells Rolm To Siemens AG (2) Touch-Tone around the world Re: Toll charges and call forwarding Cellular Modem call waiting signaling Dial Santa automatically (for a fee) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To: comp-dcom-telecom@rutgers.edu From: ron@ron.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) Subject: Re: IBM Sells Rolm To Siemens AG Date: 14 Dec 88 15:43:38 GMT If you'd actually used a Rolm phone switch, you'd know why they lost money on it. People expect their telephone service to be reliable. In addition to horrendous start up bugs on all the installations I've watched, the thing managed to scrog traditional modem connections run through it. Nearly half of the University Problems session at the last Share (a independent IBM mainframe users group) was devoted to ROLM telephone problems. -Ron ------------------------------ To: bu-cs.bu.edu!telecom@cs.utexas.edu From: harvard!cs.utexas.edu!vector!chip (Chip Rosenthal) Subject: Re: IBM Sells Rolm To Siemens AG Date: 14 Dec 88 20:20:12 GMT telecom@bu-cs.BU.EDU (TELECOM Moderator) writes in v08i0200m01: >International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) announced on Tuesday that it >was selling its Rolm telephone equipment subsidiary to West Germany's >Siemens AG. I wonder how this will impact the future of NetView, IBM's communication network management product. My understanding is that it's roots come from SNA network managment, but IBM had big plans of establishing this as the standard for telecommunication network management. Although I have never used it, my impression is that nobody likes it but a lot of folks were moving to support it because of IBM's muscle in making it a standard. I wonder if NetView will continue to be a product, and if so, how IBM's exit from the PBX market will impact it's attempt to rally support for NetView as a standard. -- Chip Rosenthal chip@vector.UUCP | Choke me in the shallow water Dallas Semiconductor 214-450-5337 | before I get too deep. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Dec 88 12:34:31 EST From: henry@GARP.MIT.EDU (Henry Mensch) To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu, westmark!dave@rutgers.edu Subject: Touch-Tone around the world From: covert%covert.DEC@decwrl.dec.com (John R. Covert) Date: 11 Dec 88 10:46 >Also, does anybody know if the tone-dial equipment there [U.K. and Europe] >uses the same tone-pairs as we do here? Yes. It is CCITT standard Q.31. ... DTMF is much more common in France -- there are even DTMF payphones in a few rare places. I've used DTMF phones in the Telehouse on Raadhuistraat in Amsterdam, but I noted that there were *none* on the streets, and none installed in the places i visited in the Netherlands. The Federal Republic of Germany and West Berlin seem devoid of touch-tone phones entirely! # Henry Mensch / / E40-379 MIT, Cambridge, MA # {decvax,harvard,mit-eddie}!garp!henry / ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Dec 88 15:24:49 PST From: sybase!calvin!ben@tis.llnl.gov (ben ullrich) To: clark%ssc-vax@beaver.cs.washington.edu, telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: Re: Toll charges and call forwarding In article you write: >X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 8, issue 195, message 3 > Station A, in area ONE, makes call to station B in area TWO. > (This is a normal toll call for station A) > However, station B is set to forward to station C back in area > ONE, where station C is in the normal free calling zone of > station A. > > How will this call be charged? > 1> as a local call > 2> as an toll call for the around trip A -> B -> C > 3> other... 3. the call will be toll for the caller from A -> B , and B will get a forwarding charge for carrying the call back to ONE (C).The idea is all calls forwarded from B to C are toll, regardless of where they originate. if B chooses to forward calls to a number that is a toll call for him/her, s/he also chooses to pay for such calls. the original caller (A) only gets charged for the number s/he originally called, not for where the call finally terminates (why should A have to pay for B's long-distance forwarding convenience ?) >The ideal case would be choice 1, but the all the required hooks are >probably not three and won't be there until IDSN becomes common. The ^^^^ ('ISDN' i bet) >other thing that almost forces choice 2, is that different carriers >may be used for each leg of the connection. (i.e. the A->B leg might >be ATT and the B->C leg might be MCI) There might even be some >non-technical tariff requirements forcing the call to be charged a >certain way... Yes, and that's what i described. as it is now, the call physically makes the round trip, for A's CO won't know where B's CO will be sending the call when it gets to B. and even if it did, wouldn't A in all fairness have to be charged for the query to B's CO to find out that the forwarding makes the call terminate in ONE (the same area as A & C ) ? It may well be that there will be no change in how the call was charged (your original question) vs. how it is routed (which may change when the network gets smarter). > ______ ______ ___ ___ ___ ________ > / ___ \ / ___ \ / / / \ / / / _____/ > / /__/ / / / / / / / / /\ \ / / / / ____ > / ___ \ / / / / / / / / \ \ / / / / /_ / > / /__/ / / /__/ / / / / / \ \/ / / /___/ / >/________/ \______/ /__/ /__/ \___/ \_______/ (this is much more fun than a company name) ...ben -- -- ben ullrich consider my words disclaimed sybase, inc. "everybody gets so much information all day long that emeryville, ca they lose their common sense." -- gertrude stein (415) 596 - 3654 ben%sybase.com@sun.com {pyramid,pacbell,sun,lll-tis,capmkt}!sybase!ben ------------------------------ To: comp-dcom-telecom@EDDIE.MIT.EDU From: mit-amt!jrd@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Jim Davis) Subject: Cellular Modem Date: 12 Dec 88 23:34:10 GMT Has anyone out there got experience with using modems via cellular phone? My experiences thus far have not been good. I have been using: an NEC P9100 phone with booster (3.0 Watts) a Morrison and Dempsey AB1 Cellular Data Adapter a Touchbase Worldport 1200 baud battery powered Hayes compatible modem on the cellular end, a Practical Peripherals 2400 SA modem at the base (set to 1200 baud, of course) Cellular One (non wireline) service from Cambridge. My tests thus far have been conducted while stationary. I have set the modems Hayes compatible parameters S7 (Wait for Carrier after Dial) and S10 (Lost Carrier to Hang Up Delay) both to 60 seconds. I have not done much testing, because air time is costly. My tests have been to transfer files and compare characters for differences. So far, I've gotten quite a lot of noise on the line, but the modems have not dropped carrier. I have been considering getting a pair of Morrison and Dempsey AB2XT modems, (which are said to use MNP level 4) but lately they don't answer their phones (or rather, a voice mail machine takes a message, but nobody calls back) 1) Does anyone know if M&D has closed? 2) Does anyone have experience with cellular modems? 3) Is there any other modem suitable for use in a car which uses MNP error correction? -- Internet: jrd@media-lab.media.mit.edu Phone: (617)-253-0314 USMail: E15-325, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139 ------------------------------ To: uunet!comp-dcom-telecom@uunet.UU.NET From: rob!toml@uunet.UU.NET ( Tom Luteran ) Subject: call waiting signaling Date: 12 Dec 88 22:05:56 GMT I am interested in finding information about the various call-waiting customer options that some local operating companies offer to their customers. What frequencies/durations of tones are used for this purpose? Is there more than one way to do this (from personal experience, some systems "click" and some "beep" different number of times) and are there any "standard" ways? Is there somewhere I can find this info? Thanks in advance. I'll post a summary when I get responses. Tom Luteran uunet!rob!toml Merck Sharp & Dohme Research Labs (201) 574-7288 P.O.Box 2000 Rahway, NJ 07065-0900 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Dec 88 12:04:36 PST From: samho@larry.cs.washington.edu (Sam Ho) To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: Dial Santa automatically (for a fee) Last week, KTZZ-TV, Channel 22 here in Seattle, broadcast a half-hour paid advertisement for an information provider called PhoneQuest. Last year, about this time, PhoneQuest was showing 30-second ads for dialing Santa at some 976 number. This year, not only did they encourage kids to call Santa, they even dialed the phone, by playing DTMF tones over the air for a Dial-It number. Just hold the phone up to the TV speaker, and pay your $2.00 plus $0.35 for each additional minute. Part way through, after some outraged phone calls, KTZZ started scrolling a message across the bottom of the screen to check with your parents first. PhoneQuest blithely explained that the broadcast tones were to prevent accidentally dialing the wrong number and getting an adult message. Merry Christmas and modern technology to you. This would never have happened in the good old days of rotary dialing. :-) Sam Ho samho@larry.cs.washington.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest *********************