Re: Acoustic couplers
Steve Crocker <steve@shinkuro.com> Thu, 03 January 2013 15:08 UTC
Return-Path: <steve@shinkuro.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6147921F8C0F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 07:08:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.469
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jjy-k1EquEId for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 07:08:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from execdsl.com (remote.shinkuro.com [50.56.68.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACD9521F8C12 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 07:08:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dummy.name; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:12:30 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Subject: Re: Acoustic couplers
From: Steve Crocker <steve@shinkuro.com>
In-Reply-To: <50E59B43.8000702@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:10:47 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2877F05C-BF25-42DE-BF77-1854CC955A54@shinkuro.com>
References: <20130102175839.2DDAE18C0BB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <01OOIM6DH1HW00008S@mauve.mrochek.com> <50E4AFAF.4000506@dcrocker.net> <01OOIXYRHRN000008S@mauve.mrochek.com> <50E59B43.8000702@dcrocker.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
Cc: ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com, Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:08:53 -0000
In 1974 I moved into a condo complex in Marina del Rey near USC-ISI. As has been my usual practice, I ordered two POTS lines and I went to the phone company to get the phones. The condo was pre-wired with jacks in each of the major rooms. The phones I got from the phone company came with plugs that were wired for either line 1 or line 2. It took me a minute of incredulity to understand the system. Each jack was wired for both lines, and each phone was wired to connect to one or the other of the two lines. Clever but definitely different from anything I had seen before. I could move the phones from room to room. Each phone "knew" whether it was for line 1 or line 2. Steve On Jan 3, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote: > > > On 1/2/2013 7:08 PM, Ned Freed wrote: >> Of course. However, we're talking about post-Carterphone here. >> Carterphone was >> 1968, and I'm sure four pin plugs were in use by then. > > Not in Los Angeles. As I recall, all the phone around there were hardwired into the 70s. > > >> Also keep in mind that AT&T fought the Carterphone decision for many years. > > So it would seem... > > I went to work at MCI in 1983, building MCI Mail. Our group was on M street, near corporate HQ. One morning I got a call telling me to come into work wearing sloppy clothes. (This was normally a 3-piece suit place.) There had been a fire on the floor above, where the MCI attorneys for the case against AT&T worked. Lots of water and smoke damage. The claim was that the fire had burned, ummmmm... especially hot... > > >> A line mod was probably against the rules irrespective of Carterphone in >> those >> days. But had you bought your own phone with a ringer switch and hooked >> that > > Not allowed at that point. All user equipment that was wired to the system had to come from the phone company in L.A. > > > d/ > -- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net
- Re: WCIT outcome? Masataka Ohta
- Re: WCIT outcome? Jorge Amodio
- WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Patrik Fältström
- Re: WCIT outcome? SM
- Re: WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Masataka Ohta
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? Alessandro Vesely
- Re: WCIT outcome? Dave Crocker
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? Dave Crocker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: WCIT outcome? Randy Bush
- Re: WCIT outcome? Victor Ndonnang
- Re: WCIT outcome? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: WCIT outcome? SM
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? Carlos M. Martinez
- Re: WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Stewart Bryant
- Re: WCIT outcome? John Day
- Re: WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Dmitry Burkov
- RE: WCIT outcome? Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: WCIT outcome? Noel Chiappa
- Re: WCIT outcome? Dale R. Worley
- Re: WCIT outcome? ned+ietf
- Re: WCIT outcome? Dave Crocker
- Re: WCIT outcome? David Morris
- Re: [IETF] WCIT outcome? Warren Kumari
- Re: WCIT outcome? SM
- Acoustic couplers (was: Re: WCIT outcome?) ned+ietf
- Re: [IETF] WCIT outcome? Patrik Fältström
- Re: WCIT outcome? Masataka Ohta
- Re: WCIT outcome? t.p.
- RE: WCIT outcome? Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: WCIT outcome? Masataka Ohta
- Re: WCIT outcome? Carlos M. Martinez
- RE: WCIT outcome? Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- RE: WCIT outcome? Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: WCIT outcome? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Acoustic couplers (was: WCIT outcome?) John C Klensin
- Re: WCIT outcome? Carlos M. Martinez
- Re: WCIT outcome? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Acoustic couplers Dave Crocker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Acoustic couplers Steve Crocker
- Re: Acoustic couplers (was: WCIT outcome?) Janet P Gunn
- Re: Acoustic couplers John C Klensin
- Re: Acoustic couplers John C Klensin
- Re: Acoustic couplers Steve Crocker
- Re: WCIT outcome? Dale R. Worley
- RE: WCIT outcome? Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- RE: WCIT outcome? Tony Hain
- Re: WCIT outcome? Ted Hardie
- Re: WCIT outcome? Patrik Fältström
- RE: WCIT outcome? Tony Hain
- RE: WCIT outcome? SM
- Re: WCIT outcome? Ted Hardie
- Re: Acoustic couplers Dale R. Worley
- Re: WCIT outcome? Randy Bush
- Re: WCIT outcome? Eliot Lear