I called the mobile of a friend, to arrange a haircut. Her mobile sent
me to voicemail, which is normal, as she does not take calls if she is
cutting somebody's hair. I left a message for her to call me back.
A couple of hours later, her mobile called me, but it was clearly an
unintentional call. There was the muffled sound of two people having a
conversation, mostly unintelligible, as though the 'phone was in a
pocket or handbag, and was just along for the ride.
Suddenly, amongst all the mumble mumble sounds, one word came through
loud and clear:
"ALCOHOL!",
then more mumbling etc.

Surprisingly, I was able to cancel the call from my DECT 'phone.
Usually, when I get one of those "You have an unknown charge on your
bank card" calls, I cannot clear it until it stops of its own accord,
which is infuriating.
Why the different behaviour?

--
Davey.

..
>
> Surprisingly, I was able to cancel the call from my DECT 'phone.
> Usually, when I get one of those "You have an unknown charge on your
> bank card" calls, I cannot clear it until it stops of its own accord,
> which is infuriating.
> Why the different behaviour?
>

not sure .. but back in the days of Strowger exchanges, the call was
held by the calling party - apparently all the mechanical gear had to be
cleared in a specific order, from the final selector back to the originator.

For obvious reasons there were special arrangements in place for 999
calls, so that the final selector was locked until the 999 operator
released it.

I believe that GSM mobile to mobile calls could be cleared by either
party, but no idea what happens with fixed to (the various flavours of)
mobile or vice versa - its probably a free for all

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 11:00:06 +0100
Abandoned Trolley <fred@fred-smith.co.uk> wrote:

> not sure .. but back in the days of Strowger exchanges, the call was
> held by the calling party - apparently all the mechanical gear had to
> be cleared in a specific order, from the final selector back to the
> originator.
>

Once years ago, my parents called me, and failed to put the handset back
properly. I could hear them talking, but could not clear the line.
Luckily, I knew the name of their neighbours, so I went to my
neighbour, got my parents' neighbours' number, called them, and they
went over to my parents and got them to put their handset down. I have
no idea how long I would have had to wait. Would they have got a Howl
at their end after a while, with my end closed?

> For obvious reasons there were special arrangements in place for 999
> calls, so that the final selector was locked until the 999 operator
> released it.
>
> I believe that GSM mobile to mobile calls could be cleared by either
> party, but no idea what happens with fixed to (the various flavours
> of) mobile or vice versa - its probably a free for all

Quite likely. The scammer to my landline - I can't clear it. My
friend's mobile to my landline - I can clear it.

--
Davey.

On 16/04/2024 11:30, Davey wrote:
> I have
> no idea how long I would have had to wait. Would they have got a Howl
> at their end after a while, with my end closed?

It used to be about 3 minutes. Time to put one phone time, walk to the
other end of your mansion, and pick up another phone on the same line.
It was, supposedly, reduced to a few seconds, many years ago, because
people with mansions use cordless phones, and the scammers were taking
advantage.

(People continued to be told it was a problem, with scammers, long after
the release timeout was reduced, because once the warning was out, it
was difficult to recall it.)

Mobile networks release on hangup. The System X vintage landline system
has distinct signals for hangup and release - there is a reanswer that
undoes a hangup, before it times out to a network release.

At least some VoIP systems translate hangup to hold, and don't release
the call immediately.