|
|
The Telecom Digest for June 19, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 164 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: FTC: say goodbye to "Stacey at Account Holder Services" (Sam Spade)
Re: 45 Years Ago-- Succasunna NJ 1ESS (Sam Spade)
Re: Going through Modems (Scott Dorsey)
Re: Going through Modems (Scott Dorsey)
Re: FTC: say goodbye to "Stacey at Account Holder Services" (Jim Haynes)
====== 28 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
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: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:10:34 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: FTC: say goodbye to "Stacey at Account Holder Services"
Message-ID: <Ac6dnY6B1OG17ofRnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
danny burstein wrote:
> oh, and:
>
> "The FTC reminds consumers that if they get a robocall
> they did not authorize, they can file a complaint by
> going to: www.donotcall.gov or by calling 1-888-382-1222"
>
> - however, the web page will NOT accept a complaint
> if you don't have a CNID number to fill in to the
> FTC box. Which happens, of course, if you either
> don't pay for CNID, don't have a display, or if
> they've been blocking it.
>
> (And yes, I've written Real USPS Letters to the FTC
> as well as to my US Senators pointing out this
> little problem. No reply. No surprise).
>
I explored the FTC's role in Do Not Call violations some years ago. I
managed to speak with someone who was knowledgeable. She told me that
their mandate on that list was simply to gather statistics; that they
had neither the resources nor the Congressional mandate to enforce the
list. But, she added, Congress had included the provision to give
individuals the option to file a civil lawsuit for any individual
violators. So, if you're really, really rich, there is recourse.
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:15:49 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 45 Years Ago-- Succasunna NJ 1ESS
Message-ID: <ArqdndrTRv0LA4fRnZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
markjcuccia@yahoo.com wrote:
>>I also wonder how many people use Call Forwarding today, especially
>>in these days of cheap cell phones. The article pointed out a
>>problem-- forgetting to turn off Call Forwarding when you've
>>returned home.
I don't have any idea of the subscription rate. But, we use it
everytime we go on a trip. We forward the wireline to the cell phone.
Unlike the X Generation our cell phone is off and put away except when
away on a trip. It is far more transparent to forward the "home"
phone to the cell phone.
Also, we have remote access to call forwarding, which is an invaluable
service to us.
As far as forgetting that CF is set, our unit of AT&T (formerly Pacific
Bell) provides a short reminder ring every time a call is forwarded.
So, if we're home that is a very strong reminder. Pacific Bell has had
that option since the started offering calling features in the early 1970s.
We lived for a time in Oregon. Then NW Bell did the reminder
differently. Whenever CF was in effect when you went off-hook for dial
tone you got three stutter dial tones followed by steady dial tone.
Central office voicemail waiting was continuous stutter dial tone.
Date: 17 Jun 2010 11:18:37 -0400
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Going through Modems
Message-ID: <hvdecd$eof$1@panix2.panix.com>
danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>In <hum5lj$abo$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>
>>schmerold2@gmail.com <schmerold2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>I have been going through dial-up modems every couple of months, when
>>>the modem goes, I can connect to Internet, however none of the other
>>>phones get dial-tone unless, I physically remove phone cable from the
>>>computer.
>>>
>>>I am thinking there is a bad ground somewhere, but not sure how to
>>>correct. What say the telcom oracles?
>
>>The modem is not going off-hook and is pulling down the line so the line
>>appears off-hook.
>
>For the modem to turn off, so to speak, the computer's connection
>to the phone line, wouldn't the modem need to go "on hook"?
Right. That process is not working correctly. The modem is not "turning off"
and disconnecting from the line. Most probably one of the protection devices
in the modem is damaged and shorted across the line.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Date: 17 Jun 2010 11:21:05 -0400
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Going through Modems
Message-ID: <hvdeh1$gbb$1@panix2.panix.com>
In article <hun34b$la5$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
tlvp <tPlOvUBpErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote:
>GlowingBlueMist wrote:
>> On 6/7/2010 5:14 PM, schmerold2@gmail.com wrote:
>>> I have been going through dial-up modems every couple of months, when
>>> the modem goes, I can connect to Internet, however none of the other
>>> phones get dial-tone unless, I physically remove phone cable from the
>>> computer.
>>>
>>> I am thinking there is a bad ground somewhere, but not sure how to
>>> correct. What say the telcom oracles?
>>>
>> From my BBS days I vaguely remember an optional command that could be
>> used in the modem command string. It was used to force modems to
>> terminate a call on lines that would not drop loop current properly at a
>> call termination. Symptom is just what you describe, the modem ends a
>> connection but the phone line is not released for use by others. The
>> modem is not detecting the loop current drop when the modem call ends
>> and so stays "off hook" regardless of what the other end does.
>>
>> The actual command eludes my memory but it would force the modem to
>> release the line regardless of the loop current condition ...
>
>Wouldn't a +++ escape followed a second later by an ATH[Enter]
>(or an ATH0[Enter]) take the modem on-hook and thus release the line?
Not if the modem is broken in such a way that it is stuck off-hook.
Which is a very common failure; high voltage trash on the line causes
the protection diodes to fail.
I'd suggest the original poster get the telco to replace the protection
network in the network interface, and possibly add additional line protection
at the network interface. Also check the network interface ground.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:21:26 -0500
From: Jim Haynes <jhaynes@cavern.uark.edu>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: FTC: say goodbye to "Stacey at Account Holder Services"
Message-ID: <GtKdnZgwqpUb1ofRnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@earthlink.com>
On 2010-06-17, danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>
> - however, the web page will NOT accept a complaint
> if you don't have a CNID number to fill in to the
> FTC box. Which happens, of course, if you either
> don't pay for CNID, don't have a display, or if
> they've been blocking it.
I've filed numerous complaints about these robo-callers, through the
web page. As I recall they ask if you know the phone number of the
caller or the name of the caller, and I can supply the (obviously
phony) name the caller used. Don't know if my complaints had anything
to do with it, but I'm sure glad to hear action is being taken against
them.
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.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?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) 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 (5 messages)
|
or 