Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cwjcc!gatech!rutgers!netsys!vector!telecom-gateway From: westmark!dave@uunet.uu.net (Dave Levenson) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Caller ID Privacy Question Message-ID: Date: 10 Sep 89 02:21:26 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA Lines: 22 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 362, message 7 of 8 In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: ... > I have been viewing the discussion of caller id (CID) from the > sidelines, since it is very doubtful that Pacific Bell will be > offering CLASS features in the near future and I'm sure my prefix won't > see it in this century (unless they figure out how to make it work in a > 1ESS). Here in NJ, we have Caller*Id from our local 1ESS switch. Having subscribed to this service for about six months, I've noticed which areas in this LATA transmit the calling number, and which don't. It appears that the pre-ESS switches, and the 5ESS switches don't identify the calling party. The 1ESS and 1AESS do (except in Summit!). -- Dave Levenson Voice: (201) 647 0900 Westmark, Inc. Internet: dave@westmark.uu.net Warren, NJ, USA UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave [The Man in the Mooney] AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave