29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for May 06, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 115 : "text" Format
====== 29 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ====== |
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime. - Geoffrey Welsh
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
|
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 17:56:12 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Busy trunks--subscriber behavior
Message-ID: <7cmdnXxsfJExaFzQnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Sam Spade wrote:
>
> The No. 1 and 1A would eventually dump the permanent off-hook to the
> receiver off-hook (ROC) routine, then to suspend status ("dirty"
> battery). If traffic were really busy, the ROC tone would not be provided.
I was mixing two unrelated fields by mistakenly using "ROC" when "ROH"
represents receiver off hook.
Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 05:53:30 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Toll switching history articles BSTJ
Message-ID: <4rudnU7AELhWAF_QnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lisa or Jeff wrote:
> The September 1952 Bell System Technical Journal had a series of
> articles on the development of nationwide toll telephone service:
> "Automatic Switching for Nationwide Telephone Service Clark,
> Fundamental Plans for Toll Telephone Plant, Nationwide Numbering Plan,
> and Automatic Toll Switching Systems." Interesting stuff.
>
> Also included is a discussion of design details for reliability
> reliability--a layperson would not realize all the minute issues that
> must be considered for reliability; as well as a report on
> semiconductor electrical noise.
>
>
> Issue table of contents:
> http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol31-1952/articles/bstj31-5-976.pdf
>
I get an article on relays. How do I get to the article on nationwide
toll service?
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 01:43:47 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: DSL Reports: AT&T Caps Have Arrived
Message-ID: <ipsvcj$q8j$1@reader1.panix.com>
In <4DC1885E.1060109@annsgarden.com> Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> writes:
>150-250 Monthly Caps, $10 Per 50 Gigabyte Overages
>by Karl Bode Monday 02-May-2011
>Back in March we exclusively were the first to report that AT&T would be
>imposing usage caps and overages on their terrestrial broadband users.
>Those caps have officially arrived, with DSL users now facing a 150 GB
>monthly cap, and U-Verse users now facing a 250 GB monthly cap. Both DSL
>and U-Verse users must pay $10 per every 50GB above the cap they travel.
>As our original report noted, only users who exceed the new usage cap
>three times -- across the life of your account, not per month -- will be
>forced to pay these new per byte overages.
>http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Caps-Have-Arrived-114012
Aside from my general "this is ugly and wrong and f'ed up"
reaction, there's the related issue that each time you pull
up a web page, you're "treated" to oodles and oodles of
third party advertising (and worse) that eats away at your
bucket of bytes.
Admittedely it's "just" a small percentage of your total, but
that's like saying those spam phone calls to your cellular [a]
are only using a few of your minutes.
In other words, Mrs. Lincoln, aside from that little incident,
how was the play?
[a] of course if you're on a pre-pay-by-the-minute account
you're hit each and every time. Same for email/sms text spam.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 21:40:50 -0500
From: Joessassy73 <user@compgroups.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Do you know where there are Teletype machines for sale?
Message-ID: <2sqdnQRku5Gvk1_QnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Hello everyone, I am new to this site but after reading what's on
here. I have a few teletype machines in my barn not really sure the
condition. Probably 4-5 of them they are older like you used to see in
the movies . I live in Massachusetts if anyone has a use for them I
would rather they not hang around waiting for the barn to fall down
also a lot of ham radio stuff too if anyones interested let me know
thanks
joe
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 17:41:56 -0400
From: "Geoffrey Welsh" <gwelsh@spamcop.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Busy trunks--subscriber behavior
Message-ID: <5e292$4dc31908$4038ffec$28817@PRIMUS.CA>
Stephen wrote:
> and modems can be even worse.....
On a slightly different but somewhat related topic:
I seem to recall ILECs complaining that long modem connections were
playing havoc with their provisioning plans... despite the growth of
the overall market, the fate of companies like AOL suggests that the
number of dialup users has shrunk. I wonder how much the factors used
in provisioning planning changed as broadband replaced dialup as the
most common connection type? Perhaps the high availability of trunk
capacity mentioned in this thread is - at least in part - the result
of capacity added during the dialup heyday and underutilized since?
Or have technology upgrades over the past decade or two simply
provided so much capacity that voice traffic can't normally put a dent
in it?
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 17:56:45 -0400
From: "Geoffrey Welsh" <gwelsh@spamcop.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Looks like "fake caller ID" laws are about to get a boost
Message-ID: <d46ec$4dc31c80$4038ffec$29581@PRIMUS.CA>
Rich Greenberg wrote:
> What I have done is ask them to wait, "I'mm just finishing a call on
> the other line", then press hold and go about my business, glancing
> at the phone from time to time. Most give up after 4-5 minutes, I
> have occasionally had one wait 10-15 minutes.
I'd worry that eventually I'd encounter one of the extra-vindictive
ones who either dialed my number himself or can retrieve it from the
dialer and find some way to submit it to a system (or multiple
systems) that will call it at inconvenient times. Telecom equipment
question: surely there are at least some predictive dialers that can
provide the agent with the called number? They'd need that to comply
with do-not-call requests, no?
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of The Telecom Digest (6 messages)
Return to Archives ** Older Issues