Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!bionet!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Cellular Intercept Quiz Message-ID: <9798@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 16 Jul 90 07:44:56 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Lines: 28 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 490, Message 1 of 10 "Peter M. Weiss" writes: > (3) When I call from a COCOT to the cell phone, and it is powered off, > I get an intercept message from the cell service provider and then the > COCOT _eats_ my quarter. It's the latter which concerns me. Simple, and the subject of a personal campaign. The COCOT has no way of detecting answer supervision, so the internal microprocessor "listens" for voice from the other end. They are pretty good at this, but they can't tell the difference between a "hello" and an "I'm sorry...". There are two ways around it. Give COCOTs answer supervision indication or coin COS lines is one. Not bloody likely to happen soon. The other would be for the cellular provider to preface the recording (indicating that the cell phone is unavailable) with SIT. Most COCOTs are smart enough to know that anything following SIT is advisory and not supervised. And they won't collect the money. I have been trying to get the cellular providers in this area to do that for some time, but I have yet to find anyone who knows what I am talking about. Does this give anyone any ideas about saving money when checking your messages on your machine or voice mail? Oops, did I say that? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !