Telex over IP.

Hi y'all,

Does anyone here have any knowledge of Telex over IP? Does anyone
provide this service? What is the cost? Are Telex numbers available?

Thanks

Adrian.

Telex is no more, it ceased years ago.


"Adrian Auer-Hudson" <adrian_h_hudson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1128380273.749110.286530@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
| Hi y'all,
|
| Does anyone here have any knowledge of Telex over IP? Does anyone
| provide this service? What is the cost? Are Telex numbers available?
|
| Thanks
|
| Adrian.
|

Stickems wrote:

"Telex is no more, it ceased years ago."

Thanks. Is this just in the UK, or, worldwide?

Adrian.

In article <434558f1$0$84028$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreene ws.net>,
"Stickems." <Stickems.@last.invalid> writes:
> "Adrian Auer-Hudson" <adrian_h_hudson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1128380273.749110.286530@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>> Does anyone here have any knowledge of Telex over IP? Does anyone
>> provide this service? What is the cost? Are Telex numbers available?
>>
> Telex is no more, it ceased years ago.

Telex has not yet ceased. While it has largely been superseded by fax
and email, it certainly does still exist. Prices for its supply and for
calls are still very much part of the current BT Price List (section 8).
http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/c...boo/sectoc.htm

It is certainly very little used in the UK now. There are parts of the
world where it hasn't died down quite as much as in the UK. The latest
list of UK embasssies, consulates, etc. abroad, published by the FCO
this summer, gives telex numbers for its establishments in a few countries.
http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/Ov...ulyAug2005.pdf

On the subject of "Telex over IP" it is more perhaps meaningful to talk
of a gateway between the Internet and the Telex network. Since the
Internet is very good at passing streams of encoded characters - which
is after all what Telex is - there is not much involved. The Internet
protocol Telnet, for example, is trivial to interface to telex. A more
useful gateway is one between email and the telex network, enabling one
to effectively send an email to a remote telex machine. The main issue
in both cases is in adding appropriate authorisation and accounting,
since the telex network is not cheap to use, so no one is likely to
provide a free gateway onto the telex network as a whole.

Unfortunately I'm not aware of any gateways still in operation in either
of these areas. I did make use of the BT service the "TNA" which acted
as a gateway between their X.25 network (PSS) and the telex network, and
I think I even used it via an Internet to PSS gateway, essentially then
providing a Telnet to telex gateway.

Gateways between the Internet and Telex network have no doubt withered
away as fast as telex machines themselves, but I'm sure some will remain
in operation for those determined enough to hunt them down. Although I
tried a few quick Google searches, nothing useful appeared.

--
Tim Clark

I'm not convinced that Telex still exists. Couldn't the telex numbers shewn,
in the list that you refer to, be there because no one has updated these
entries? Why would anyone want to use Telex?

"Tim Clark" <Timothy.Clark@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:bukg13-ccm.ln1@basil.tcict.co.uk...
| In article <434558f1$0$84028$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreene ws.net>,
| "Stickems." <Stickems.@last.invalid> writes:
| > "Adrian Auer-Hudson" <adrian_h_hudson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
| > news:1128380273.749110.286530@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
| >>
| >> Does anyone here have any knowledge of Telex over IP? Does anyone
| >> provide this service? What is the cost? Are Telex numbers available?
| >>
| > Telex is no more, it ceased years ago.
|
| Telex has not yet ceased. While it has largely been superseded by fax
| and email, it certainly does still exist. Prices for its supply and for
| calls are still very much part of the current BT Price List (section 8).
| http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/c...boo/sectoc.htm
|
| It is certainly very little used in the UK now. There are parts of the
| world where it hasn't died down quite as much as in the UK. The latest
| list of UK embasssies, consulates, etc. abroad, published by the FCO
| this summer, gives telex numbers for its establishments in a few
countries.
| http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/Ov...ulyAug2005.pdf
|
| On the subject of "Telex over IP" it is more perhaps meaningful to talk
| of a gateway between the Internet and the Telex network. Since the
| Internet is very good at passing streams of encoded characters - which
| is after all what Telex is - there is not much involved. The Internet
| protocol Telnet, for example, is trivial to interface to telex. A more
| useful gateway is one between email and the telex network, enabling one
| to effectively send an email to a remote telex machine. The main issue
| in both cases is in adding appropriate authorisation and accounting,
| since the telex network is not cheap to use, so no one is likely to
| provide a free gateway onto the telex network as a whole.
|
| Unfortunately I'm not aware of any gateways still in operation in either
| of these areas. I did make use of the BT service the "TNA" which acted
| as a gateway between their X.25 network (PSS) and the telex network, and
| I think I even used it via an Internet to PSS gateway, essentially then
| providing a Telnet to telex gateway.
|
| Gateways between the Internet and Telex network have no doubt withered
| away as fast as telex machines themselves, but I'm sure some will remain
| in operation for those determined enough to hunt them down. Although I
| tried a few quick Google searches, nothing useful appeared.
|
| --
| Tim Clark

"Stickems." <Stickems.@last.invalid> wrote in message
news:434676db$0$30203$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfr eenews.net
> I'm not convinced that Telex still exists. Couldn't the
> telex numbers shewn, in the list that you refer to, be
> there because no one has updated these entries? Why would
> anyone want to use Telex?

Because it can be classed as a legally binding document, something no
other means of electronic communication can.

Which is why it is still used by legal firms.

Ivor

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?

Fax and emails are both legally binding documents and so are telephone
calls.


"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3qndk5Fg0lilU1@individual.net...
|
|
| "Stickems." <Stickems.@last.invalid> wrote in message
| news:434676db$0$30203$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfr eenews.net
| > I'm not convinced that Telex still exists. Couldn't the
| > telex numbers shewn, in the list that you refer to, be
| > there because no one has updated these entries? Why would
| > anyone want to use Telex?
|
| Because it can be classed as a legally binding document, something no
| other means of electronic communication can.
|
| Which is why it is still used by legal firms.
|
| Ivor
|
| --
| A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
| Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
| A: Top-posting.
| Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?
|
|

"Stickems." <Stickems.@last.invalid> wrote in message
news:43468164$0$70955$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfr eenews.net
> Fax and emails are both legally binding documents and so
> are telephone calls.

Cite examples. They cannot be, because there is no way to prove they have
not been forged.

Please don't top post.

Ivor

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:20:17 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:

>Cite examples. They cannot be, because there is no way to prove they have
>not been forged.

same applies to telex. Its only a bit of paper coming out of a
printer, no great challenge to simulate that.

Emails used in evidence :-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4315896.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3485072.stm

didn't see anyone saying "oh that wasn't me it was just a forgery"

Phil
--

Usenet spam eaten by a Hamster http://www.tglsoft.de/
No more cable clowns :-))
Please do not feed or re-quote the trolls.

"Stickems." <Stickems.@last.invalid> wrote in message
news:434676db$0$30203$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfr eenews.net...
> I'm not convinced that Telex still exists. Couldn't the telex numbers
> shewn,
> in the list that you refer to, be there because no one has updated these
> entries? Why would anyone want to use Telex?


Telex is still heavily used in the International Ship Owning/Broking market.
I work for a Ship Broking company and know that our company, just in London,
have around 5 Telex numbers, I can't remember how many of the overseas
offices have them and we still have Telex lines coming into the office.

Most companies have moved over to Email/fax but there are some who are in
the dark ages still want to use Telex.

Paul

"Phil Thompson" <phil.thompson@spamcop.net> wrote in
message news:af4dk1d1kosl33c95mtpq776oo0mog2rg0@4ax.com
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:20:17 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Cite examples. They cannot be, because there is no way
> > to prove they have not been forged.
>
> same applies to telex. Its only a bit of paper coming out
> of a printer, no great challenge to simulate that.

Not exactly, there are (or were,anyway) significant differences. The
historical reasons for telex being accepted as legal documents comes from
the fact that the paper used to come from a mechanical teleprinter on a
continuous roll, not from a page printer as with computers. The typeface
used was also distinctive and the messages (on later machines like the
Creed 444) bi-coloured, red for transmitted text and black for received.
This would be very difficult to simulate on a computer printer, you can
always tell when a typewriter document is an original or a copy, the same
applies to a teleprinter output.

> Emails used in evidence :-
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4315896.stm
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3485072.stm
>
> didn't see anyone saying "oh that wasn't me it was just a
> forgery"

Perhaps they are unaware of just how easy it is to forge an email.

Ivor

"Paul Haslam"
<get_rid_of_everything_before_the_dot.gphaslam@hot mail.com>
wrote in message news:di67k9$uke$1@domitilla.aioe.org

[snip]

> Telex is still heavily used in the International Ship
> Owning/Broking market. I work for a Ship Broking company
> and know that our company, just in London, have around 5
> Telex numbers, I can't remember how many of the overseas
> offices have them and we still have Telex lines coming
> into the office.
>
> Most companies have moved over to Email/fax but there are
> some who are in the dark ages still want to use Telex.

I was using a Creed 444 on Amateur Radio RTTY until quite recently.
There's something about the smell and sheer "presence" of a large
mechanical teleprinter thumping out the message letter by letter at 50
bauds..! Electronic communications just isn't the same ;-)

Ivor

This stuff is interesting. But, I take it there is little chance of
one ever having an ATA with a Telex port?

A.

"Adrian Auer-Hudson" <adrian_h_hudson@yahoo.com> wrote in
message
news:1128706052.836296.236580@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com
> This stuff is interesting. But, I take it there is
> little chance of one ever having an ATA with a Telex port?
>
> A.

I very much doubt it.

Ivor

In article <1128706052.836296.236580@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups .com>,
"Adrian Auer-Hudson" <adrian_h_hudson@yahoo.com> writes:
> This stuff is interesting. But, I take it there is little chance of
> one ever having an ATA with a Telex port?

It wouldn't be an "ATA" since that's an "Analogue Telephone Adapter".
Telex machines did not use the analogue telephone system.

Instead what is required is an item of equipment typically called a
"terminal concentrator". They were used for connecting dumb terminals to
the Internet. 15-20 years ago there were plenty around. You can plug
serial devices - teleprinters if you want - into them on one side; they
have ethernet on the other. I'm sure there are plenty of discarded ones
around.

Once the dumb terminal, or teleprinter, is plugged into the terminal
concentrator, and the concentrator is connected to the Internet, the
terminal can get the concentrator to initiate a telnet call over the
Internet to anything else talking the same protocol, telnet. This could
well be another terminal concentrator with a teleprinter on it. The
similarity with telephones using VoIP is obvious.

Without a gateway, phones connected to ATAs are restricted to
communicating with other things talking the same VoIP protocol, like
other ATAs. Similarly, without gateways, teleprinters connected to
concentrators talking telnet are restricted to communicating with other
things talking telnet.

With VOIP the existence of a gateway on the Internet for the VoIP
protocol used, connected to the PSTN, allows the phone connected to the
ATA to call via that gateway to a phone on the PSTN. It is exactly the
same with the teleprinter connected to a terminal concentrator: to get
through to the Telex network there needs to be a gateway on the Internet
which is connected to the Telex network.

As I mentioned in my earlier response, such gateways have existed in the
past. Whether there are any still in operation would need some
searching. As with VoIP gateways to the PSTN, the main issue with telnet
gateways to the public Telex network is not technical, but one of
authentication and charging.

--
Tim Clark

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 17:44:51 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:

>This would be very difficult to simulate on a computer printer, you can
>always tell when a typewriter document is an original or a copy, the same
>applies to a teleprinter output.

snipping the wire and driving the same device with a laptop is not
beyond my imagination, mind in these criminal act / forgery
discussions I often find people looking at me rather oddly.

Phil
--

Usenet spam eaten by a Hamster http://www.tglsoft.de/
No more cable clowns :-))
Please do not feed or re-quote the trolls.

"Phil Thompson" <phil.thompson@spamcop.net> wrote in
message news:3csdk15lrb69m7e31hnqd64g35e8h7ktcp@4ax.com
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 17:44:51 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
> > This would be very difficult to simulate on a computer
> > printer, you can always tell when a typewriter document
> > is an original or a copy, the same applies to a
> > teleprinter output.
>
> snipping the wire and driving the same device with a
> laptop is not beyond my imagination, mind in these
> criminal act / forgery discussions I often find people
> looking at me rather oddly.

To be honest I doubt that the average crook would have a clue how to
simulate an 80V-0-80V teleprinter signal..! I was really talking about the
days when telex was in full swing, the continuous roll was seen at the
time as sufficient to give telex the status of a legal document, which I
find hard to believe even now that fax and email enjoy.

Ivor

Tim Clark wrote:

"With VOIP the existence of a gateway on the Internet for the VoIP
protocol used, connected to the PSTN, allows the phone connected to the

ATA to call via that gateway to a phone on the PSTN. It is exactly the

same with the teleprinter connected to a terminal concentrator: to get
through to the Telex network there needs to be a gateway on the
Internet
which is connected to the Telex network."

Thank you Tim. I take it from the foregoing, that the only way to have
true capability to originate and receive telex calls, i.e. with one's
own telex number, is to sign up for "real" hard wired, Telex service.

Telex over IP was a nice thought while it lasted! :-)

A.

In article <1128879864.089831.77800@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups. com>,
"Adrian Auer-Hudson" <adrian_h_hudson@yahoo.com> writes:
> Tim Clark wrote:
>
> "With VOIP the existence of a gateway on the Internet for the VoIP
> protocol used, connected to the PSTN, allows the phone connected to the
>
> ATA to call via that gateway to a phone on the PSTN. It is exactly the
>
> same with the teleprinter connected to a terminal concentrator: to get
> through to the Telex network there needs to be a gateway on the
> Internet
> which is connected to the Telex network."
>
> Thank you Tim. I take it from the foregoing, that the only way to have
> true capability to originate and receive telex calls, i.e. with one's
> own telex number, is to sign up for "real" hard wired, Telex service.
>
> Telex over IP was a nice thought while it lasted! :-)

I expect there ARE some gateways from the Internet to Telex still in
service. The first problem is finding them. They quite possibly persist
for those few niche business sectors which still use telex. The parent
group, uk.telecom, might be a better place to ask.

The second problem will be the cost. Telex is expensive, and is only
retained by those who are not detered by the high price they pay for it.
Any remaining gateways to the telex network are likely to be expensive
to use, due to the small number of users and high cost of telex calls.
They'll be catering for that tiny number of users who still need access
to telex, at almost any price.

--
Tim Clark

Is this the sort of thing you're looking for?

http://www.easylinkservices.co.uk/internettelex.cfm

Andy Lord wrote:
> Is this the sort of thing you're looking for?
>
> http://www.easylinkservices.co.uk/internettelex.cfm

That would seem to solve the outgoing issues. But, I see nothing about
incoming, or, the allocation of a Telex number. If this were the
equivalent of efax it could be an effective alternative to "Telex over
IP".

Thanks for the URL

Adrian.

For send & receive you need their RealTelex, which is a bit closer to
actual Telex over IP, I've no idea on cost though. I had a peripheral
connection with a company that Easylink acquired a few years ago and
this type of service seemed to be very expensive at that time.

Andy