Volume 28 : Issue 164 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Pulse vs. touch tone, was ANI
====== 27 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 Patrick Townson 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
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: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 08:16:36 -0700
From: Sam Spade <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Pulse vs. touch tone, was ANI
> On Jun 9, 9:53 am, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:
>> Because it's slower. When you're dialing a number, the switch needs
>> to allocate a digit buffer (which has some other telco name I forget)
>> until you've dialed all the digits, and that takes several times
>> longer with pulse dialing. The switch needs to include enough buffers
>> to handle the peak hour number of simultaneously dialed calls.
> I believe a switch has some sort of status word containing various
> details of the call, and this exists for the duration of the call. It
> is built as the call progresses.
> In any event, computer memory is so incredibly cheap these days the
> cost of a some extra memory is trivial relative to the total cost of
> the switch. Think about how cheap PC memory has become and how much
> you get today compared to just ten years ago, let alone 20 years ago.
> There is no extra cost to provide pulse dialing.
What do you say to the argument about the cost of assigning real-time
priorities to the switch's CPU? The gentleman who commented on that
seem to have a great grasp of the concept.
Either hardware has to be present to buffer the origination dial pulsing
or the switch has to "see" it as it's happening. I suppose the call
program could create a software file each time someone goes off-hook but
that would represent processor time as well.
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
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. 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 currently being moderated by Bill Horne while
Pat Townson recovers from a stroke.
Contact information: Bill Horne
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: firstname.lastname@example.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: email@example.com?body=unsubscribe telecom
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) 2008 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
End of The Telecom digest (1 message)