TELECOM Digest     Tue, 16 Mar 93 03:01:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 182

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

   Re: How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise? (Bill Blum)
   Blizzard Causes AT&T Network Congestion (Richard Pauls)
   Re: No 900 in Louisiana? (Paul Robinson)
   Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier (Steve Forrette)
   Re: Telecom in Brazil, BAD? (Jarom Hagen)
   Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Dick Rawson)
   Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Robert L. Ullmann)
   Re: "457 Channels and Nothin' on..."  (Robert L. Ullmann)
   Info on Data Superhighway (or Whatever) (William Eldridge)
   Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy ([email protected])
   My Case Against CLID - Rebuttal to John Higdon (Gordon Zaft)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 12:32:01 EDT
From: Bill Blum <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: How Do I Get Rid of Line Noise?


Richard Sherman asks:

> The problem is I get quite a bit of line noise in the electrical
> system from other things in the house (dishwashers, ovens, etc.).  I
> was wondering if something like a phone line noise or surge supressor
> could be put between the phone line and the modem to eliminate this?
> Any help would be appreciated.

I hope the following helps ... snarfed from a local BBS, this filter
does work (even tho it's rather dated) ... Pat ... text is long,
don't know if this is worth archiving or not.

     ----------------  Noise Filter Instructions  ----------------

Modem Noise Killer (alpha version)

With this circuit diagram, some basic tools including a soldering
iron, and four or five components from Radio Shack, you should be able
to cut the noise/garbage that appears on your computer's screen.

I started this project out of frustration at using a US Robotics 2400
baud modem and getting a fair amount of junk when connecting at that
speed. Knowing that capacitors make good noise filters, I threw this
together.

This is very easy to build, however conditions may be different due to
modem type, amount of line noise, old or new switching equipment
(Bell's equipment), and on and on. So it may not work as well for you
in every case. If it does work, or if you've managed to tweek it to
your computer/modem setup I' d like to hear from you.

I'd also appreciate any of you electronic wizards out there wanting to
offer any improvements. Let's make this work for everyone!

Please read this entire message and see if you understand it before
you begin.

OK, what you' ll need from Radio Shack:

1 #279-374 Modular line cord if you don't already have one. You won't need one
if your phone has a modular plug in its base. $4.95

1 #279-420 Modular surface mount jack (4 or 6 conductor) $4.49

1 #271-1720 Potentiometer. This is a 5k audio taper variable resistor. $1.09

1 #272-1055 Capacitor. Any non-polarized 1.0 to 1.5 uf cap should do. Paper,
Mylar, or metal film caps should be used, although #272-996 may work as well.
(272-996 is a non-polarized electrolytic cap) $.79

1 100 ohm resistor - quarter or half watt. $.19

1 #279-357 Y-type or duplex modular connector. Don't buy this until you've read
the section on connecting the Noise Killer below. (A, B,or C) $4.95

First off, open the modular block. You normally just pry them open
with a screwdriver. Inside you'll find up to six wires. Very carefully
cut out all but the green and red wires. The ones you'll be removing
should be black, yellow, white, and blue. These wires won't be needed
and may be in the way. So cut them as close to where they enter the
plug as possible. The other end of these wires have a spade lug
connector that is screwed into the plastic. Unscrew and remove that
end of the wires as well. Now, you should have two wires left. Green
and red. Solder one end of the capacitor to the green wire. Solder the
other end of the capacitor to the center lug of the potentiometer
(there are three lugs on this critter). Solder one end of the resistor
to the red wire. You may want to shorten the leads of the resistor
first. Solder the other end of the resistor to either one of the
remaining outside lugs of the potentiometer. Doesn't matter which.

Now to wrap it up, make a hole in the lid of the mod block to stick
the shaft of the potentiometer through. Don't make this hole dead
center as the other parts may not fit into the body of the mod block
if you do. See how things will fit in order to find where the hole
will go.  Well, now that you've got it built you'll need to test it.
First twist the shaft on the potentiometer until it stops. You won't
know which way to turn it until later.  It doesn't matter which way
now. You also need to determine where to plug the Noise Killer onto
the telephone line. It can be done by one of several ways:

A. If your modem has two modular plugs in back, connect the Noise
Killer into one of them using a line cord. (a line cord is a straight
cord that connects a phone to the wall outlet. Usually silver in
color)

B. If your phone is modular, you can unplug the cord from the back of
it after you're on-line and plug the cord into the Noise Killer.

C. You may have to buy a Y-type modular adaptor. Plug the adaptor into
a wall outlet, plug the modem into one side and the Noise Killer into
the other. Call a BBS that has known noise problems. After you've
connected and garbage begins to appear, plug the Noise Killer into the
phone line as described above. If you have turned the shaft on the
potentiometer the wrong way you'll find out now.  You may get a lot of
garbage or even disconnected. If this happens, turn the shaft the
other way until it stops and try again. If you don't notice much
difference when you plug the Noise Killer in, that may be a good sign.
Type in a few commands and look for garbage characters on the screen.
If there still is, turn the shaft slowly until most of it is gone. If
nothing seems to happen at all, turn the shaft slowly from one side to
the other. You should get plenty of garbage or disconnected at some
point. If you don't, reread this message to make sure you've connected
it right.


***END OF ORIGNAL FILE***

ADDITION TO ORIGNAL FILE - 2/29/88 - Mike McCauley - CIS 71505,1173

First, a personal recomendation. _THIS WORKS!!!_  I have been plagued with
noise at 2400 for some time.  A few pointers:

1) The pot need not be either 5K or audio taper. I used a 10K 15 turn trim pot.
  Suggest you use what is handy.
2) I used 2MFD's of capacitance (two 1MFD's in parallel) Two R.S. p/n 272-1055
  work fine. Remember that about 90 Volts will appear across red & green at
  ring, so the caps should be rated at 100VDC+.
3) I ended up with a final series resistance value (100 ohm + pot) of 2.75K.
  I speculate that one could probably use 2MFD and a fixed 2.7K resistor and
  do the job 90% of the time. The adjustment of the pot is not very critical.
  Changes of +/- 1K made little difference in the performance of the circuit.

------------------------------

From: Richard Pauls <[email protected]>
Subject: Blizzard Causes AT&T Network Congestion
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 13:46:26 -0500


> [Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for taking the time and going to
> the expense to send us a message from that phone. I hope your trip was
> pleasant and not to someplace where the airport is shut down. By the
> way can anyone give us any weather related telecom updates from the
> eastern states? Are they even getting through at all?   PAT]

Well on Saturday I tried for about 15 minutes to place a call from MA
(508) to PA (215) using AT&T but I kept getting the "we're sorry all
circuits are busy" recording.  I hung up and redialed using the MCI
prefix and got a ring, but then I hung up (just wanted to see if it
really worked). I tried AT&T several more times -- same message.  Then
I dialed the AT&T operator and told her I couldn't get through (I was
wondering if she would give me a prefix code for another carrier if
she couldn't connect me now).  She tried twice and on the second
attempt my call was connected via AT&T.  Does she have some kind of
controlled access to different long distance circuits that allowed her
to avoid the "all circuits bussy" message that I kept getting?  Will I
have to pay for an operator assisted call this way?


Thanks,

Rich


[Moderator's Note: Usually it is the operator's discretion in cases
like this, but generally no you won't. You'll get direct dial rates
since you explained the problem to the operator.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 13:40:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: No 900 in Louisiana?


[email protected] (J. Philip Miller)  asks:


> Having just seen an ad for NBC's weather line (1-900-WILLARD) it
> stated it was not valid in Louisiana.  Have they passed a law that
> makes all 900 service illegal or only those that give their proceeds
> to charity?

1.  The service is run OUT OF Louisiana and the service is not tariffed
   for intrastate use.
2.  There would be taxes imposed upon the service provider (not likely,
   but possible).
3.  Louisiana does not allow value-added telephone call services, or has
   banned them, or there is a collectability problem.

Louisiana has had a long history of problems with relations with other
states because of its history of French Civil Law as opposed to the
British Common Law which the other 49 states use.  It's only been
about a couple of years that the Louisana Legislature has approved the
Uniform Commercial Code, which until it did made contracts hard to
execute.

If you're in Louisana, ask the local telephone company.

Telephone services over 900 area code calls from outside that state
are interstate in nature; if the state is hindering their operation,
it is acting unconstitutionally.  Probably nobody wants the trouble
and expense of bothering with a court trial to force collection, so
they just refuse to accept calls from there (or they plan to sue but
until the telephone companies there will provide billing via a court
decision authorizing it, they won't carry calls.)  Or it could be that
telcos there won't provide billing, the information provider must bill
directly (which is too much trouble.)

Did you try asking NBC?


Paul Robinson -- [email protected]

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier
Date: 15 Mar 1993 21:50:43 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


@DATAPHONE@In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:

> [email protected] (Stephen Friedl) wrote:

>> "These home office specialists can answer questions about
>> installing a business line in your home or setting up a computer modem
>> or fax machine."

> Well, when Pacific Bell started to send similar sorts of notices, I
> was similarly suspicious ... I learned that (at least for Pacific
> Bell) they were not especially interested in pushing business-
> tariffed services on me; they were interested in selling ordinary
> home-tariffed services which would make doing occasional business at
> home easier.

I can put in a good word for the Pacific Bell office that handles the
'home office' orders.  They never tried to push business
class-of-service on me.  I had had really poor luck with the regular
residential office with any order more complicated than a single line
with standard custom calling features.  Any time I had a requirement
for multiple lines, especially in combination with unusual custom
calling features (no answer transfer, hunting, etc.), the order would
never be set up properly the first time.  The 'home office' people
seemed to have an extra amount of training in all of these things, and
were able to actually understand the order correctly the first time.


Steve Forrette, [email protected]

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Jarom Hagen)
Subject: Re: Telecom in Brazil, BAD?
Date: 15 Mar 93 18:00:23 GMT
Organization: NPRI, Alexandria VA


[email protected] (Cris Pedregal-Martin) writes:

> The technology might not have been dazzling (e.g., pulse instead of
> tone), but it worked (high call completion rates, good intercepts,
> very few wrong numbers).  And, also, rates were very cheap (compared
> with other state-owned, third-world rates such as neighboring
> Argentina's. Problems associated with wider-ranging (political,
> economical) issues, of course, existed: sometimes bad customer service
> (labor conflict), use of tokens instead of coins (inflation).  And
> there were some pearls too, like automated collect calls (even within
> a city); I think one dialled 9+number and two synchronized recordings
> would come on, opening a short window to say one's name (or whatever);
> hanging up meaning non-acceptance of charges. There were also calling
> cards (charge, like in the US); all these things at least since the
> late 70s.

It has been a few years since I was in Brazil.  I remember a couple of
things that weren't mentioned.  One is the "Big-Ear" payphones that
were not high quality in that sometimes shouting was needed to
communicate and the second is that, at least in the northeast, you
have to *buy* your telephone *line*.  So, not only do you pay for the
service, you have to buy the line (and number) that gets connected to
your house.  This tends to discourage telephones in homes.  There also
seems to be a problem in capacity in the northeast as people selling
telephone numbers charged a lot for them.  I also remember the cost of
calling the U.S. from Brazil to be much higher that calling Brazil
from the U.S.

> My "comment" (more bordering on an essay, sorry) is not very current,
> but I just felt I had to challenge a stereotype ...

Yes, I don't know if service is worse than GTE, I never had to call
the local phone company while I lived there.

> com saudades do Brasil,

       Eu tambem.


Jarom
*Not paid for and/or endorsed by NPRI.  602 Cameron St, Alexandria VA 22314
(UUCP: ...uunet!uupsi!npri6!jhagen)       (Internet: [email protected])

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 15:19:48 PST
From: [email protected] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing


Now that you mention distinctive ringing, I remember a similar problem
with our fax machine.  When we moved from Centrex service to a PBX, we
started getting a "distinctive ring" for all calls from outside.
Outside calls rang as short-long, while extension calls rang normally.
The fax wouldn't answer until the PBX was made to give normal rings.


Dick

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here!
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 01:54:46 GMT


An observation I made while looking at the 93 NYNEX white pages (which
I hadn't had any reason to crack open until reading this): people with
combined business/residence listings, under the business name with a
secondary entry starting with /res/, appear in both the residence and
business parts of the directory.

BTW, I like this directory format.


Robert Ullmann  [email protected]     +1 508 879 6994 x226

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: "457 Channels and Nothin' on..."
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 02:15:12 GMT


Paul Robinson writes a very interesting article on cable TV and the
future of video distribution. (BTW: I subscribe to a system with 89
active channels, out of a possible 104.)

I and others in the data network protocol business are working very
hard on building an internet technology that will allow any user to
watch any "station" (video source) whenever desired. Ready for maybe
50,000 channels?

Of course, just like best-selling books, some will be *very* popular.

The flip side is even more interesting: with a *very* small
investment, anyone can be a video source ...


Robert Ullmann   [email protected]    +1 508 879 6994 x226

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (William Eldridge)
Subject: Info on Data Superhighway (or Whatever)
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 03:48:19 GMT


I'm trying to research various pertinent questions and alternatives to
the proposed data superhighway, and was hoping someone could refer me
to or send me either interesting viewpoints on this or general
overviews.


Thanks,

Bill Eldridge    [email protected]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 23:44:35 -0500
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy


In article <[email protected]> Dave Liebold writes:

> Perhaps an idea should be borrowed from the white page introductory
> sections of many other countries (Australia is one such country, I
> believe): a brief description of the phone service (emergency numbers,
> how to dial, etc) is translated into many languages.

I don't remember the phone books, but from when I was there last year,
I recall that some public phones in Melbourne have instructions in
English, Italian, Greek, and possibly Vietnamese; further north on the
Gold Coast, it's English and Japanese (for tourists of the predominant
nationality, no doubt).

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Gordon C Zaft)
Subject: My Case Against CLID - A Rebuttal to John Higdon
Date: 16 Mar 93 06:02:59 GMT
Organization: NSWSES, Port Hueneme, CA


I finally figured out the response to John Higdon's persistent claims
that Caller-ID should be enabled by default.  It's this --

       Do you walk around with a nametag?  Probably not.  Similarly,
if I walk up to your door and knock, it would be reasonable of you to
ask who I am.  I might give you my name, or I might not.  In either
case you might or might not wish to speak to me.  You may have a
policy saying "I don't open the door to anyway who won't identify
themselves", and that's fine.

       The point being, just as I don't broadcast my identity when I
go around town, I shouldn't have to broadcast my identity when I call,
either.  On the other hand, you should be able to ask my identity by
means of a block, or a anonymous-call-rejection.  In which case I can
either identify myself, or not talk to you.  It seems quite clear to
me that the default should be no identification unless it's explicitly
done (just like you looking through your peephole and making me hold
up my ID so you can see it before opening the door).


Gordon Zaft                   [email protected]
PHD NWSC, Code 4Y33           [email protected]
Port Hueneme, CA 93043-5007   Phone: (805) 982-0684 FAX: 982-8768


[Moderator's Note: This message was published specifically to provide
a rebuttal to recent messages by John Higdon. However, to avoid the
sort of email floods these things cause me and the slow, agonizing
death from boredom it causes many readers, perhaps continued dis-
cussion between interested parties can be moved to the privacy forum.
Thanks.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #182
******************************


Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253

You are viewing proxied material from infinitelyremote.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.