🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: alt.dcom.telecom
Article #438

Re: SBC & Remote Access Call Forwarding

#438
From: trent
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:23
33 lines
2835 bytes
Steve Kraus wrote:
> 
> When did SBC abolish remote access call forwarding* and why?  I had it from
> Ameritech, continued it when I signed up with an alternative telco that
> simply resold SBC/Ameritech service ("CLEC").  I recently switched back to
> SBC since they hold DSL hostage (you have to have their voice service
> before they or anyone can put DSL on their line) and I'm horrified to learn
> that they don't offer this service although their switch obviously still
> does it since it was working up to the moment of changing back to SBC.  My
> business is very small and I forward to my cel when I'm not there.  Remote
> controlability of CF was an important feature and I'm going to have to
> scramble to come up with an alternative.  Frankly, had I known I would not
> have switched and feel I have been duped.  There is another provider who
> actually runs their own wires and already has a presence in our building so
> may have to look into that.
> 
> (* This is a service that lets you call a number from elsewhere, enter your
> phone number, a PIN and follow prompts to activate or deactivate call
> forwarding.)
> 
> Can anyone recommend a good, simple, and inexpensive CF box that I can use
> that will answer a line and dial out on a 2nd line?  Needs remote control
> of course but don't need any other features.  I would probably keep telco
> CF but use this in situations where I would have used remote access in the
> past.

I don't recall when, but it was because remote-callback was being used
to perpetrate fraud using others' call-back numbers.  Clarification?

trent
-- 
"This user has a pattern of behaviour in the usenet group chi.forsale
that borders on abusive."
Technical Details
Message-ID: <40D9CA93.2174@trentland.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net!nntp.giganews.com.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.mbo.net!gail.ripco.com!not-for-mail
References: <KUiCc.902$LC7.807@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1126ff,b62b9eac4b9d9ad6
X-Google-Thread: 10e835,b62b9eac4b9d9ad6
X-Google-Attributes: gid1126ff,gid10e835,public
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net!nntp.giganews.com.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.mbo.net!gail.ripco.com!not-for-mail
From: trent <oozenet@trentland.com>
Newsgroups: alt.dcom.telecom,chi.general
Subject: Re: SBC & Remote Access Call Forwarding
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 13:23:15 -0500
Organization: Mmmmmmm, bacon.
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <40D9CA93.2174@trentland.com>
References: <KUiCc.902$LC7.807@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.146.78.166
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: e250.ripco.com 1088015403 22644 216.146.78.166 (23 Jun 2004 18:30:03 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ripco.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:30:03 +0000 (UTC)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)