From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Oct 26 03:07:28 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id DAA14931; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 03:07:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 03:07:28 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199510260707.DAA14931@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: telecom-recent Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #451 TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 Oct 95 02:30:00 EDT Volume 15 : Issue 451 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ITA Scam is a Done Deal (Tom Crofford) Re: How to Make Dial-Up Stay Up as Long as Possible (Richard Neveau) Cellular Phone Caller ID (Colin A. Johnson) Email Over the Telephone? (Paul Dixon) Area Code Authoritative List (Bruce Pinsky) I Need Help Finding Cellular Modems (Michael A. Manzelli) A WWW Usenet Newsgroups Archive System on Internet (Gang Cheng) Looking For Business Partner(s) in China (Zhenjun Zhu) CDPD and Ardis (Greg Baxter) Subject/Author Index Now Updated (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 16:28:51 -0500 From: tomc@xeta.com (Tom Crofford) Subject: ITA Scam is a Done Deal I posted a message a couple of months ago about how an ITA company billed me for two months of "voicemail" on my SBC telephone bill. I contacted SBC and ITA. SBC told me they could refuse the billing, but ITA would probably turn my account over to a collection agency. ITA said I had subscribed to a personal ad/voicemail service by calling an 800 number. Needless to say, I did not do this. In this case, ITA was the billing agent for an Absolute Communications (based in NYC). Absolute Communications can be reached via U.S. Mail only. They apparently do not have telephones. ITA removed the second month's billing when I called, but refused to remove the first month's billing. I contacted my Senator, Don Nickles, and asked for his assistance. He corresponded with the FCC. SBC also sent me a couple of letters and offered again to stop payment. SBC also contacted ITA on my behalf. Today SBC called me at the office and told me ITA had removed the first month's billing from my account. Reba at SBC told me ITA had apparently just received the FCC's inquiry. This is the first time any company has attempted to rip me off personally on my telephone bill. As a telecom professional, these practices tremedously insult me. As I told Don Nickles, I hope Congress can find a way to eliminate these ridiculous practices without adversely affecting the freedoms that make U.S. telecom and the Internet so powerful. Tom Crofford tomc@xeta.com 918-664-6876 fax [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We have discussed Absolute Telecom here in the past. They are also very fond of advertising 800 number for hot chats and being very casual about mentioning in the introductory message how much it will cost. Their billing goes through Integratel for that part of it. We printed their address here, and also an 800 number for them in New York. I agree though the phone number was a joke; the line was *always* answered by a malfunctioning answering machine with no outgoing message on it. They never returned any calls either. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Richard Neveau Subject: Re: How to Make Dial-Up Stay Up as Long as Possible Date: 25 Oct 1995 22:03:44 GMT Organization: DSC Communications In Dallas at least you can pay for "dedicated" dial-up. You are the only one with the number and it is EXPECTED you will be on 24hrs x 7days. You can even get dedicated single IP OR dedicated LAN (a network on your end). Of course 28.8 or ISDN. Even low priority on the 2nd B channel of ISDN so you only get the 128K when ISP is not 'busy'. I would hate to have to deal with the telco's and get a real dedicated line if I was in a hurry to get 'on-line' !! In most parts of the country it seems ISP's could use a little more competition. In Dallas we have enough of a real free market that you can get just about any flavor hookup you need. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Who are the other telecom companies operating there? PAT] ------------------------------ From: colinaj@ix.netcom.com (Colin A. Johnson ) Subject: Cellular Phone Caller ID Date: 25 Oct 1995 23:05:15 GMT Organization: Netcom I am trying to find out how caller ID works on cellular phones. I have been getting the ignore message when I call people with call blocking on. When I called AT&T wireless services they said that I need to start my calls with *82 and then the number. Is there a way to get caller ID to show up on my phone display when people are calling my cellular phone? Your help is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Colin ------------------------------ Date: 25 Oct 95 17:08:32 -0700 From: PDIXON.US.ORACLE.COM Subject: Email Over the Telephone? Does anyone know of a service that will read email messages over the telephone? I had a hack worked out with MobilComm text paging, but it was too expensive. Paul [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interestingly enough, ATT Mail did this quite a few years ago when they first opened that service to the public. ATT Mail was around for awhile previously as an employee-only thing, and I guess in the late 1980's it 'went public'. One of the things I liked about it when I was using it back then was that you could call from any phone and have your mail read to you by a synthesized voice. I do not know if they are still offering that feature or not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bpinsky@cisco.com (Bruce Pinsky) Subject: Area Code Authoritative List Date: 26 Oct 1995 00:28:34 GMT Organization: Cisco Systems, Inc. Reply-To: bpinsky@cisco.com I've searched the archives and I've searched at Bellcore. Is there any authoritative, up to date list of all the North American area codes? Thanks, Bruce Pinsky Cisco Systems, Inc. + Sr. Internetwork Supt Engr+ 170 West Tasman Drive + Phone: (408) 526-8874 + San Jose, CA 95134 + Fax: (408) 526-8787 + Cisco Systems Inc. + E-mail: bep@cisco.com + [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, area codes are a hard thing to keep up with these days. There is a file in the archives with areacodes which is out of date (and any day it gets updated it seems to be out of date a week or so later!) and there is a feature of the Telecom Archives Email Information Service called AREACODE which will return the geographic location of an area code based on the input given. It too is out of date ... perhaps one of our regulars who works on this from time to time -- I am thinking of Carl Moore, because it really is his baliwick -- will fetch the copy now in the archives and send it along to me with as many corrections and updates as he can think of. It would be good to have an updated table there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sfd48@ix.netcom.com (Michael A. Manzelli) Subject: I Need Help Finding Cellular Modems Date: 26 Oct 1995 01:24:34 GMT Organization: Netcom I own a small communications buisness that deals with many Fire Dept. and Hazardous Materials units. I have been receiving many requests for Cellular Fax Machines and cellular PCMIA cards. My problem is that none of my suppliers carry this item, nor know where to get them. I look forward to any information any one can give to me. SFD48@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ From: Gang Cheng Subject: A WWW Usenet Newsgroups Archive System on Internet Date: 25 Oct 1995 23:10:47 GMT Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse NY, USA We at Northeast Parallel Architecture Center (NPAC), Syracue University have developed an archive system for searching/reading USENET newsgroups, mailing lists and personal mailbox from WWW. An Oracle database server is used to store/manage mails and two search/navigation interfaces accesible by any WWW browser to the archive are provided: one is an advanced search interface allowing queries with various options such as query by mail header, by date, by subject (keywords), by sender. The other is a Hypermail-like navigation interface for users familiar with Hypermail. We offer free access to this archive for the Internet community. Check the URL: or . The whole archive is automatically updated in every 30 minutes. Currently the following newsgroups (total 67) are archived in the database, including this newsgroup/mailing-group: (..) shows the current total number of mails archived in the database alt.comp.compression (46) comp.ai (375) comp.ai.neural-nets (152) comp.ai.philosophy (464) comp.arch (549) comp.benchmarks (202) comp.compression (388) comp.compression.research (28) comp.databases (704) comp.databases.object (181) comp.databases.oracle (2461) comp.dcom.cell-relay (175) comp.dcom.frame-relay (149) comp.dcom.isdn (929) comp.dcom.lans.fddi (55) comp.dcom.lans.misc (71) comp.dcom.net-management (96) comp.dcom.servers (98) comp.dcom.sys.cisco (898) comp.dcom.telecom (380) comp.dcom.videoconf (149) comp.graphics.visualization (139) comp.infosystems (93) comp.infosystems.gis (406) comp.infosystems.www.advocacy (247) comp.infosystems.www.announce (869) comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi (1647) comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html (3995) comp.infosystems.www.authoring.images (679) comp.infosystems.www.authoring.misc (634) comp.infosystems.www.browsers.mac (681) comp.infosystems.www.browsers.misc (577) comp.infosystems.www.browsers.ms-windows (2095) comp.infosystems.www.browsers.x (467) comp.infosystems.www.misc (1157) comp.infosystems.www.servers.mac (256) comp.infosystems.www.servers.misc (209) comp.infosystems.www.servers.ms-windows (602) comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix (724) comp.lang.basic.visual.database (601) comp.lang.basic.visual.misc (2474) comp.lang.c++ (3764) comp.lang.java (1850) comp.lang.oberon (170) comp.lang.perl.announce (27) comp.lang.perl.misc (1702) comp.lang.rexx (265) comp.multimedia (1202) comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc (1546) comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools (493) comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32 (1163) comp.os.ms-windows.setup (608) comp.parallel (80) comp.parallel.mpi (41) comp.parallel.pvm (103) comp.protocols.tcp-ip (358) comp.security.misc (515) comp.software-eng (459) comp.sources.unix (8) comp.sys.sgi.graphics (188) comp.sys.sun.admin (948) comp.unix.admin (837) comp.unix.aix (1261) comp.unix.misc (337) comp.unix.programmer (658) comp.unix.solaris (1881) syr.general (218) The following mailing lists (total 8) are archived: hotjava-interest (mailing-list) (788) java-announce (mailing-list) (8) java-interest (mailing-list) (1479) java-porting (mailing-list) (279) perldb-interest (mailing-list) (173) sp-discussion (mailing-list) (51) win95-l@peach.ease.lsoft.com (mailing-list) (507) www-vrml (mailing-list) (3235) This system is still under development and more functions are planned to add to this system. Please send your comments to: Gang Cheng (gcheng@npac.syr.edu). Thanks, Gang ------------------------------ From: zhuz@qucis.queensu.ca (Zhenjun Zhu) Subject: Looking For Business Partner(s) in China Date: 26 Oct 1995 03:40:02 GMT Organization: Computing & Information Science, Queen's University A telecommunication and cable TV company in a booming area of Shanghai-Pudong Area, China is seeking joint venture relationship with one or a few North-America or European companies. This company has been a leader in providing cities and towns of China with cable television services. Its objectives are: o Building the infrastructure to facilitate the provision of services, including cable TV, and data and voice communication. o Providing complete networking solutions to the customers in the booming area of Pudong and Shanghai. There will be large number of domestic and foreign businesses opening in the next 10-20 year and the market for data and voice communication services is huge. o Promoting the advances in the telecommunication and computer communication technologies in China, in both hardware and software. The joint venture partner can help the Chinese partner in making more technological progress, standardizing the products and services. It is also expected that the foreign partner(s) make investments into the joint venture in forms of equipments and technology. As one of the benefits, the foreign partner will get an entrance into the huge Chinese market and get the help from Chinese partner in aspects which require dealing with Chinese legal, financial and other government agencies in order to run a business. There are huge potential market for companies which are seriously looking at the China market. If your company is interested in discussing this issue in further details, or obtain more information, please contact Zhenjun Zhu E-mail: zhuz@qucis.queensu.ca Mail address: 13-302 15 MacPherson Ave. Kingston, Ontario Canada K7M 2W8 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am told phone service in China is expanding and growing at an incredible pace. Is that correct? PAT] ------------------------------ From: gregbaxter@aol.com (GregBaxter) Subject: CDPD and Ardis Date: 26 Oct 1995 00:52:05 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: gregbaxter@aol.com (GregBaxter) Where is a good place to start... We need to send packet data over RF to remote non-wire laptops. Cellular cdpd and Motorola's Ardis comes to mind I guess. We want to place this data on laptops fed from a Unix server. Any ideas? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 01:41:20 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Subject: Subject/Author Index Now Updated The subject/author index for this Digest has been updated as of October 25 to include all issues through 450. You may wish to pick up a copy in the Archives for future reference. You should also note that the SEARCH command in the Telecom Archives Email Information Service uses this index, along with the previous indexes for volumes 9-14. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #451 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Oct 26 23:21:58 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA17258; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 23:21:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 23:21:58 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199510270321.XAA17258@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: telecom-recent Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #452 TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 Oct 95 21:59:00 EDT Volume 15 : Issue 452 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telephone Nostalgia and Old-Time-Radio (Mark J. Cuccia) "Networking Personal Computers With TCP/IP" by Hunt (Rob Slade) Re: FAX Machine as Page Scanner (Brian C. Shensky) USWEST Files For ISDN Tariff to Be Set in Utah (Vince Hadley) Phone Service in China (Hao Shen) Frontier Telecom Experiences? (Randolph Fritz) Digest is Now Encrypted on Usenet (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Telephone Nostalgia and Old-Time-Radio Date: 25 Oct 1995 15:12:44 GMT Organization: Tulane University Just a bit more of old exchange names and telephone numbers used on an old radio drama -- for those interested in nostalgia. Last night I heard an episode of "Nightbeat" starring Frank Lovejoy on the weeknight WHEN RADIO WAS, a syndicated Old-Time-Radio program. The episode originally aired in July 1950 and was entitled `The City at Your Fingertips'. In the series Nightbeat (NBC Radio, early 50's), Frank Lovejoy played a newspaper reporter who specialzed in crime and murder stories. I don't remember offhand where the series took place -- whether it was Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, etc., but the actual production of the radio program was from Hollywood, of course. In the episode `The City at Your Fingertips', Frank Lovejoy was a bit bored and thought about 'doodling' with the telephone. He mentioned that there were some six million possible telephone number combinations of a seven digit local number. (Actually that is or was not *exactly* correct and will be explained later). He just picked up the telephone and randomly dialed a seven digit number. Of course we know that this *could* be considered a form of harassment, but he reached some woman who was locked in her estranged husband's studio apartment. She told him that her husband was mentally sick and had left her locked in there and would probably return to kill her. She had tried to call her husband's doctor but the answering service said that he was out and would check in occasionally that evening. Since Frank Lovejoy was playing the part of a newspaper reporter in this series, this type of situation was right up his alley. He tried to get her to determine the exact location of where she was, but she didn't exactly know. He did give her his phone number (BUtterfield exchange), but since he dialed her randomly, he didn't have her's, and forgot to ask her the number. He did get the telephone number of her husband's doctor, and he kept getting the answering service everytime he called. Other exchange names used were ANdover, EDgewater, RAndolph, and even MEridien for the time-of-day recording. One interesting thing -- at one point, Frank Lovejoy calls the operator and asks how to call the Police. The operator told him to dial `211'. Many larger cities used 211 to call for a Long Distance operator. The use of 911 as a standard code for Emergencies didn't come around until 1966 or 67. The operator did say that she could ring the Police directly, though. Throughout the drama, Frank Lovejoy kept getting several incoming calls -- from his editor and from a drunk! He called the operator and asked if it was possible for the Operator to block out incoming calls except from the Police, the doctor, and the woman. The Operator said that they could only block incoming *Long-Distance* calls (since at that time Long Distance comming into his city would still be manually handled at a toll board). Local calls were handled by automatic dial equipment and the operator had no control over blocking out incoming local calls. And there was no such thing as Call-Waiting or Caller-ID back in 1950. I enjoyed hearing the grinding and clickity-click of the old style metal rotary dials -- the older style of bells ringing -- and the sound-effects of and *older* dialtone, busy, ring indication, etc. Frank Lovejoy was going frantic waiting for the desperate woman to call him back -- or get a call from her husband's doctor -- but he still kept getting calls from this drunk. And he was also on the phone trying to inform the Police about the situation, however he randomly dialed the woman on the phone -- and didn't ask her for her number. There was no way he could give the Police the number! Well, eventually the receptionist for the answering-service of the woman's husband's doctor called and said that she got through to the doctor who knew where the woman actually was -- and that the husband had been taken off to a hospital or asylum -- and that the woman was safe but under sedation. Frank Lovejoy asked why they hadn't called earlier -- and was told by the answering service receptionist "Well, I've *been* calling you but *your* line has been busy!" In many ways, this radio drama reminded me of another one -- Lucille Fletcher's "Sorry Wrong Number" which was performed several times on CBS Radio's "Suspense" series back in the 1940's and 50's, starring Agnes Moorehead. (Barbara Stanwick did the movie -- including the Lux Radio Theater performance of the movie version). And, of course, this was in 1950 -- back when there was electromechanical switching technology in place. While automated long distance switching was just in its first stages for full nationwide service, most toll and long-distance calls were still handled by operators. And the actual number of possible seven digit combinations was *really* 5,400,000 back in 1950. Most locations using two-letter exchange names did *not* use any names/letters from the 55, 57, 95, or 97 combinations. San Francisco *did* have the KLondike exchange name used back then, but that was probably one of the few places that did use 55x for any local exchanges. Most exchange name locations also did *not* use `0' as a third digit, as it could have been confused with the letter `O' which is really the numeral `6'. There are eight numbers on the dial with letters (I don't think any areas ever used the letter `Z' for significant letters of dialable exchange names -- and not all dials back then had Z with the 0/Operator hole on the dial). You multiply 8x8 and get 64 possible combinations -- subtract out 4 (the 55, 57, 95, 97) and then multiply 60 by 9 (for the third digit) and get a possible 540 three-digit exchanges available in a large city or areacode. Multiply 10,000 possible line-number comibinations within a central office code with 540 possible codes/exchanges, and you get 5,400,000 -- not six million. When exchange names were dropped -- but before N0X and N1X exchanges were introduced -- you could have 64 possible `NN' exchange combinations -- and possible number of exchanges was 640 (if you include such special ones as 950, 555, 976, 958, 959, 970, etc), which means 6,400,000 possible numbers. When N0X and N1X codes are introduced, you get a possible 800 codes- but in practice they normally don't use the N11 codes, so you get 792 codes and 7,920,000 possible numbers. And if Frank Lovejoy was just `doodling' around with the telephone -- I wonder what he would have got if he had dialed an N1X or N0X code or began something with a `1'. It is possible that it could have been 'ignored' by the switch (absorbed), or it could have been a 11X service code used in some areas. And then again, he might have dialed `0' as his first digit and cut through to the operator right away, regardless of whatever followed- 0+ dialing didn't exist in 1950, neither! How far we have come since 1950- But right now, I'm looking at my BLACK rotary dial (metal dial) Western Electric 500 deskset on my desk -- with the number card stating "UNiversity 5-5000, EXT.5954" MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 13:39:44 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Networking Personal Computers With TCP/IP" by Hunt BKNPCTCP.RVW 950725 "Networking Personal Computers with TCP/IP", Craig Hunt, 1995, 1-56592-123-2, U$29.95 %A Craig Hunt %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1995 %G 1-56592-123-2 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$29.95 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 408 %T "Networking Personal Computers with TCP/IP" Most computer users work on PCs. Personal computers are cheap and widely available, with a variety of support resources (not the least of which is the guy-next-door-down-but-two). Some computer professionals, however, would make the case that PCs are not "real" computers: PCs have much more in common with consumer goods than information technology. There is a very real gap between those who use internetworks and workstations, on the one hand, and those who use PCs, on the other. The very concept of a network is one of the distinctions. To computer professionals, a network is a system of different communications links which allow computers to exchange data and distribute processing tasks. To a PC user, a network is a wire-that-runs-around-the-office-and- we-all-share-a-printer. It's no wonder the two sides don't communicate. Hunt's book is primarily aimed at network administrators for larger systems who are beginning to integrate PCs into the structure. There are some very helpful tips about Intel/BIOS/ISA hardware, operating system(s), and utilities. DOS, Windows, Windows 95 and NT systems, and TCP/IP implementations are addressed. Email, file, and print services are covered. There is even a chapter devoted to the integration of NetWare and TCP/IP. Among the appendices, a list of vendors and texts is particularly helpful. The book assumes a technical background, but no specific knowledge of the PC itself. The material is generally quite clear, however, and those familiar with personal computers may also find this a very helpful introduction to some of the concepts and activities in the wider computing world. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKNPCTCP.RVW 950725. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. ROBERTS@decus.ca rslade@cln.etc.bc.ca rslade@freenet.vancouver.bc.ca "If you do buy a computer, don't turn it on." - Richards' 2nd Law of Security Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94311-0/3-540-94311-0 ------------------------------ From: shensky@umd.umich.edu (Brian C. Shensky) Subject: Re: FAX Machine as Page Scanner Date: 26 Oct 1995 17:56:03 GMT Organization: University of Michigan I have noticed that connecting the fax machine directly to the Fax/modem does not supply the line voltage necessary to send the data over the line. So what does one do? Easy: steal the voltage from your existing line. What I do is take a third phone off the hook and wait for it to go "dead": past the initial dialtone, past the "please hang up" recording, and finally, past the grinding hang-up-the-goddam-phone blaze tone. Eventually, the line goes dead, while voltage is still being passed through the line. Now you can send from the fax to the PC all on a single line. Make sense? Brian SHENSKYbrian 313.454.9603 (home) shensky@umich.edu (email) 313.780.3213 (page) http://www.umich.edu/~shensky (www) ------------------------------ From: vhadley@ee.utah.edu (Vince Hadley) Subject: USWEST Files for ISDN Tariff to be Set in UTAH Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 18:30:15 GMT Organization: University of Utah Computer Center USWEST will be filing for a tariff to be set for ISDN service possibly by the end of October (in the next few days). Estimates have it that they will be asking for possibly $70+ for Basic rate service. They are also planning to increase the already expensive commercial rates by 45%! Other telecoms in other states have it much lower ... around $25-35 per month. And added to that there is no gaurantee that you'll even see a flat rate for ISDN but a measured service as in some states like Arizona, although Colorado managed to get it set as a flat rate. After all, it is only your money ... This tariff is being filed through the Utah State Public Service Commission which acts to regulate these tariff requests. Ordinarily, there is an almost rubber stamp approval of these tariffs unless there is sufficient opposition to them. The commission will usually schedule a hearing date only a week or two after recieving the tariff being filed so there is no time to lose. In order to have any impact on these proposals you will need to request to appear before the Public Service Commission in _Writing_ in advance. These are the people the commission pays the most attention to. Their address is: Public Service Commission Heber Wells Building 160 East 300 South Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Just showing up to the hearing has little impact, comparitively speaking, although it would still help. If you want to request to appear before the commission you must write them a letter stating so, although you _may_ be able to go down to the office and sign in that you want to appear before the commission in advance of the hearing date. We need to "PACK the house" if we are going to have any effect. These tariffs have been overturned/reconsidered/investigated before, but only with _outstanding_ (overwhelming) opposition to them- so you can indeed affect the outcome. Tell (and bring) your friend/nieghbor/associate/boss. What is ISDN? In possibly over simplistic terms, ISDN is a digital rather than analog interface that you set up between your home/business and the telephone company. Through this interface, which is much more efficient than your present analog connection, you can achieve data connection rates up to 128K when connecting to other ISDN users! This is several times faster than the fastest modems. Through this type of connection you can also continue to use the phone for voice purposes. and your normal analog modem although ISDN will begin to replace that kind of connection. Further comment by others more knowledgeable about IDSN implementation, it's use, and the other issues involved, is encouraged in order to inform others. ISDN will become widely used by almost everyone in the next few years, so this tariff affects most everyone that uses a modem now or might in the future. ------------------------------ From: hshen@gac.edu Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 12:42:57 -0500 Subject: Phone Service in China > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am told phone service in China is > expanding and growing at an incredible pace. Is that correct? PAT] That's absolutely correct! Regards, H' Hao Shen E-mail: hshen@gac.edu Student, MCS Dept. URL: http://www.gac.edu/~hshen/ Gustavus Adolphus College Voice: (507) 933 - 6184 St. Peter, MN 56082, USA FAX: (507) 933 - 6277 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've heard a lot of wild statistics tossed around on this. Some are saying new phones are being installed in China at the rate of five or six to every similar installation in the USA ... that there are more new installs there in a month than the entire USA has in six months. True or false? Any solid figures? PAT] ------------------------------ From: randolph@netcom.com (Randolph Fritz) Subject: Frontier Telecom Experiences? Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 19:14:40 GMT Having hard some thoroughly rotten customer service experiences with both ATT and MCI, I recently sat down and thoroughly researched my available long distance carriers. The choices narrowed to two: Arcata, a northwest regional carrier, and Frontier, the emerging national carrier. Unfortunately, it's hard to evaluate service quality for these firms. So I'd like to hear customer service experiences with these two firms; tell me what's good (or bad) about 'em. Randolph ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Digest is Now Encrypted on Usenet Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 20:12:00 CDT Starting with this issue of the Digest, the single messages going out to Usenet (as opposed to the larger newsletter style seen by mailing list subscribers) are using a form of encryption to authenticate them for the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup. This authentication works with 'cancelbots', software designed to immediatly cancel messages which do *not* have the proper authentication attached. By doing this, I believe the spams and other inappropriate messages placed here will, if not cease entirely, be greatly reduced. The 'cancelbots' operate at various sites around the world and their sole task is to examine all incoming news for the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup. Seeing something that is not appropriate for the group -- meaning it does not bear my *authentic* approval, the 'bot' immediatly kills the item *and* it generates a cancel via a few very well connected sites where the cancel message is introduced almost immediatly to the news stream. I am then provided with a copy of the spam or other inappropriate item. In addition, I have aliased-out certain sites from which the majority of the spam seems to originate, and I have also taken measures to forbid those same sites from receiving the Usenet comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup feed. I don't intend to say what sites they are, but I am sure you will notice them by their absence. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #452 ****************************** TELECOM Digest Fri, 27 Oct 95 12:14:00 EDT Volume 15 : Issue 453 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Change of Address For Digest and News Group (TELECOM Digest Editor) Name and Address Authentication With LD Carrier? (L.K. Chen) Multiport Serial Solutions (Steve Winter) Call Waiting and Caller Id - Is It Actually in Place? (Scott Atwood) TCP/IP Mechanics: Document Covering TCP/IP - tcpip.zip (B. Vandecasteele) Need Information to Reduce Power Consumption on Cell Phones (Cathy Lyton) Need Help With Old Key Telco Equipment (John McClellan) Pin Out Needed For Siliconix DG508 (Dave McNeill) Pay Phone TDD Wanted (Rito Astorga) DS3 Systems Distance Learning (Richard Shelor) Directory Information in Oregon Down? (rsprang@internet.cnmw.com) Re: Reverse Engineering Voice Mail (Amos Shapira) Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives (Chris Gray) Re: AT&T's Bait and Switch Tactics (Chris Sullivan) Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone (Doug Reuben) Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada ... (Peter M. Weiss) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at massis.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Change of Address For Digest and News Group Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 10:30:00 CDT Effective at this time, ALL correspondence to the Digest including editorial submissions, administrative requests, flames, spams and other correspondence should be sent to our new address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu This is also the site where the Telecom Archives is housed. Over all, it should be a great place to work from, and I think I will like it here. News admins: please change the pointers on comp.dcom.telecom at your site to reflect this change as well. ----------------------- A word of thanks to the fine people at Northwestern University who assisted me with many resources for about eight years ... your generosity was and remains greatly appreciated. PAT ------------------------------ Subject: Name and Address Authentication With LD Carrier Organization: Lunatic Haven BBS Reply-To: dreamer@mlc.awinc.com From: lkchen@mlc.awinc.com (The Dreamer) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 95 18:27:27 MST Don't Long Distance companies check to see if the person's name and address actually correspond to the actual customer and that person even wants anything to do with them? I've been getting bills from Sprint Canada, addressed to my first initial and last name at my address, for phone lines that aren't mine. They claim that that the bills came about when they aquired STN. So, I must have been an STN customer. The thing is I've never been an STN customer. I have one phone line that is with Sprint Canada, and I have it listed with my full name and address and I pay for it. I have had this line with Sprint Canada ever since competition came in. I have another line that is with fONOROLA, also have had this ever since competition started. And, again I signed up with my full name. I would've thought that you had to sign up with a full name ... but apparently 'L' is considered a full name as opposed to an initial ... my local white page listing is a single 'L' ... so its entire possible somebody decided to screw me from my white page listing. I'm the only Chen in this small city. I called Sprint Canada a couple months ago and the rep called the number that I was getting bills for, and it clearly wasn't me. So, they assured me that I could disregard these false bills and that it would be taken care of. Well, now I have a notice from a collection agency saying that Sprint Canada has filed a claim against me. It continues to be addressed to 'L Chen'. Well, I call Sprint Canada and once again they assure me that I can disregard these notices and that it will be taken care of. Other than this total lack of security and lack of action in doing something about it, I have been satisfied with my service up to this point but I think this is enough for me to go looking for a different long distance provider. Email: dreamer@lhaven.uumh.ab.ca or dreamer@mlc.awinc.com PHONE: +1 403 526 6019 FAX: +1 403 529 5102 CIS: 74200,2431 Praxis Society K12 BBS: +1 403 529 1610 Lunatic Haven: +1 403 526 6957 Packet: VE6LKC @ VE6PAQ.#SAB.AB.CAN.NA ------------------------------ From: Steve Winter <74107.210@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Multiport Serial Solutions Date: 27 Oct 1995 00:03:45 GMT Organization: compuserve.com Press Release: The STB 4COM card is now available with alternate addressing that allows up to four of the cards (16 serial ports) in one machine using Ray Gwinn's famous SIO drivers under OS/2. It also works quite well with Linux and other Unix based platforms. You can share one IRQ per card under OS/2 with Ray Gwinn's SIO drivers. A 4 port, 16bit, High Speed serial I/O card, that provides four high performance RS-232 Asynchronous Serial Communications ports, each on one separate IRQ, or allows sharing one or more IRQs. Each port INDEPENDENTLY configurable by jumpers for addresses: h3E8, h2E8, h1E8, h1A8, h3F8, h2F8, h1F8, h2A8 and for IRQs 15, 12, 11 10, 5, 4, 3, 2 * With address option You CAN use 4 4COM Cards in one machine * Address option gives h100, h108, h110, h118, h120, h128, h130, h138 There is no additional charge for alternate addressing, just ask for it. LIFETIME manufacturer's warranty & free tech support from STB. Works fine with DOS, DESQview, DV/X, Windows, and OS/2 2.+ These products are available from the following vendor: For Orders *ONLY* 1-800-SELLCOM(735-5266) Ext 9 (VISA/MASTERCARD) For Technical Questions, leasing, or outside USA call 919-286-1502 or 24 hour FAX at 919-286-4617 As seen in SysOp News, BBS Callers Digest The sun never sets on the PRIME network 919-286-2100 300-33600bps ------------------------------ From: scotta@primenet.com (Scott Atwood) Subject: Call Waiting With Caller Id - Is it Actually in Place? Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 22:13:54 MST Organization: Primenet US West in the Phoenix (AZ) area is suppose to have Call Waiting-Caller ID sometime before the end of the year ... (yeah right). I have read a few threads regarding the spec's, but all refer to the BellCore TR-NWT-000030 document. Is this spec available on the net, or libraries or does one have to shell out the $$ to receive it? I've tried to contact the local telco reps and they are of NO help. They went on to say that even they don't have a CW-Caller ID unit available for us to buy (recommended trying Radio Shack :-) ). So far I have gathered that after the CW signal is sent the caller-Id unit must [mute the handset] , send one of the [A,B,C or D] Touch Tones at which time the CO will send the Caller_ID burst. Am I even close to what is necessary? Anybody developed hardware, software to allow our fine computers to gather the info? Thanks for reading, ScottA ------------------------------ From: bvandecasteele@usr.com (Bert Vandecasteele) Subject: TCP/IP Mechanics: Document Covering TCP/IP - tcpip.zip (0/1) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 10:34:18 GMT Organization: US Robotics Hi, Some time ago I decided to make up a document that describes most of the protocols from the TCP/IP suite. The whole idea was to make one document that bundles the existing RFC's, standardizations and documents and adding graphics to it. I have attached the zipped WORD 6.0 document to this message. For those who are interested, please take a look at it (you might actually read it if you want to ...). Could someone out there convert the .doc to PS and repost it to the TCP/IP newsgroups ? Please let me know where I was right/wrong, where the errors are, what should be deleted/replaced/added, and most of all: should I continue or rather give up? (also important: what about copyrights from the original documents? Can I use the documents in this way?) I hope this document can be of any help to people who want to find out about the 'mechanics' of a TCP/IP based networks. Kind regards, Bert Vandecasteele Distelstraat 4 9000 Gent Belgium Email : bvandecasteele@usr.com Fax : +33 20870404 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Bert's document is quite lenthy, and I am not sure how well it would transmit using email, so I have placed it in the Telecom Archives for review by interested persons. Look in the /technical sub-directory of the archives under the filename 'tcp/ip.specifications'. The archives is ftp'able at ftp.lcs.mit.edu. Don't forget to use type I for binary for best results. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lytan@alpha.ntu.ac.sg Subject: Need Information on Reducing Power Consumption on Cell Phones Date: 27 Oct 95 13:33:25 +0800 Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore Hi, Does anyone have any ideas on how companies have tried to reduce power consumption on cellular phones? Thanks, Cathy lytan@ntuvax.ntu.ac.sg ------------------------------ From: maus@skypoint.com (John McClellan) Subject: Need Help With Old Key Telco Equipment Date: 27 Oct 1995 05:56:33 GMT Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. Hi, I scavenged the following items from a building that was about to be demolished and I'm wondering what exactly this stuff is and if its worth anything anymore. Any info would be greatly appreciated, thanks. ------------ Several cabinets labeled: Western Electric 1A2 Key Telesystem 620 A2 Cabinet (8 slots, 8 fuses, 2 small 66-type connector blocks) (total of five of these) Each has several 400D KTU's marked as: ISS 2, 8,10,12,14,15 also three 400G CO/PBX Line Ckts. ------------ Cabinet #1 (big) Tellabs 262 PO-6 6ckt NCTE assy w/power with: Rockwell Wescom 4112-11 Data Channel Interface 7305-45 4417A Data Channel Termination (3 empty slots) ------------ Cabinet #2 (small) Tellabs 262 UPO-2 universal ntwk terminating assy. with 2 cards ------------- Cabinet #3 (big) Tellabs 262 UPO-9 universal network term module with: five - 6044 Network Term. Modules one - Wescom 7305-45 Data Chan Interface two - Wescom 4112-11 Data Chan Interface ISS2 8001 power supply 66 Block connector ------------- Cabinet #4 (small) Western Electric DAS 829 ALIA series 5 44A2 Data Mtg -------------- T-105 Power Unit Tone Commander Thanks, Maus [TLEECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would say you have yourself an interesting phone system, considering you got it all for free. I hope you can get it to work. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@davemac.demon.co.uk Subject: Pin Out Needed For Siliconix DG508 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 13:11:27 GMT I need the pin-out information for a Siliconix DG508 analogue multiplexer. Any clues? dave mcneill ------------------------------ From: Rito Astorga Organization: Our Lady of the Lake University Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 10:02:28 CDT Subject: Pay Phone TDD Dear Sir, I've always seen you help out alot of people with equipment they need or need to know about. Well hopefully you can help me out, I'm trying to locate a TDD that can be used on a pay phone. Either new or used, what I understand it can be a booth or compact. I got a $1300 dollar price on a booth (half booth if you will) and a $280 dollar price on a compact from Graybar, and we as a poor university cannot afford such high prices. Hopefully you can me out, Thank you in advance! Keep up the good work! RITO J. ASTORGA (210) 431-3999 Our Lady of the Lake University Telecom System Manager Here's to number "7"... thanks for the memories Mickey! 1942-1995 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Anyone have any suggestions for Rito? I imagine this would be for use by students at their school. Part of the reason Rito says 'dear sir, I have seen YOU help out, etc' is because the real helpers are those of you who read the Digest. Please see what can be done. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Richard Shelor Subject: DS3 Systems Distance Learning Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 10:00:39 -0400 Organization: Delaware Technical & Community College If there is anyone out there that has experience with Bell Atlantic Distance Learning equipment I would truly be thankful for any guidance regarding technical info with respect to the operation of DS3 fiber Optic Distance Learning Systems. I am also interested in any tech manuals of the new version that would contain this type of info. Thanks, rshelor@outland.dtcc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 00:49:32 EST From: rsprang Subject: Directory Information in Oregon Down? I have been trying to call directory assistance for Oregon for several days - 503-555-1212. The phone rings, but I never get any answer. Any idea what is wrong? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No idea at all. I tried it a few minutes ago and got through on the first ring. A half-ring actually. PAT] ------------------------------ From: amoss@humus.cs.huji.ac.il (Amos Shapira) Subject: Re: Reverse Engineering Voice Mail Date: 27 Oct 1995 10:40:09 GMT Organization: Inst. of Comp. Sci., Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel cartierg@sra.com (Gene Cartier) writes: > their interface specs; others have been less forthcoming. While some > vendors do support the loose Audio Messaging Interchange Specification > (AMIS) others don't. Does anyone have any ideas on the best way to Could someone please describe or give pointers to more information about this AMIS standard? I'm sub-contracting for a company which builds such voice-mail boxes (Comverse) and I think they might be interested (unless they allready implement this, which I have a slight doubt about). Cheers, Amos Shapira 133 Shlomo Ben-Yosef st. Jerusalem 93 805 ISRAEL amoss@cs.huji.ac.il ------------------------------ From: cgra@btmaa.bel.alcatel.be (Chris Gray) Subject: Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives Date: 27 Oct 1995 11:46:52 GMT Organization: Never was my forte Reply-To: grayc@btmaa.bel.alcatel.be In article , goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes: > [...] I prefer the "mess" of several competing long distance > carriers to the neat but painful certainties of being forced to bend > over and pay the outrageous rates typically charged by monopoly > state-owned carriers in most other countries. Countries such as the UK and Australia manage to have competing carriers without making mincemeat of their numbering system, and I daresay the same goes for Finland ... the US numbering goulash is the result of hanging on for too long to what "seemed like a good idea at the time". If you ask me a Flag Day is long overdue. Chris Gray Chris_Gray@bcs.org.uk Compuserve: 100065,2102 http://plato.digiweb.com/kiffer/ ------------------------------ From: hllerith@delta1.deltanet.com (Chris Sullivan) Subject: Re: AT&T's Bait and Switch Tactics Date: 26 Oct 1995 19:48:01 GMT Organization: Delta Internet Services, Anaheim, CA Buxboyy@aol.com wrote: > I recently received a call from AT&T (regarding my residential > service), and they offered me a $70 check, and 50% off their regular > rates for the next three months, if I would "switch back" to their > service. Having been lied to by them once before, where they promised "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Since AT&T is so hot on having their customers tell MCI and company to "put it in writing", you should have done the same. I had a similar instance happen, myself. After getting screwed once by AT&T, when they called a second time and offered me some large chunk'o'change to come back, I requested that the rep "put that in writing", and I'd consider it. Funny thing happened. I never got it in writing, and I've never gotten another call from AT&T asking me to switch back. This is real humorous, considering a recent call from an MCI rep not only got me the facts "in writing", it also included a $10 credit certificate on top of it, totally unsolicited. I'm beginning to seriously reconsider who exactly the sleazeballs are in the long-distance market. Chris Sullivan | 714-648-9433 | At what point does technology hllerith@deltanet.com | Orange, CA | become indistingushible from magic? ------------------------------ From: dreuben@interpage.net (Doug Reuben) Subject: Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 05:10:26 EDT Recently, PDIXON.US.ORACLE.COM wrote: > Does anyone know of a service that will read email messages over the > telephone? Well, to be brief, we offer a service which will let you hear the HEADERS of your messages over the telephone, and if you determine that the message merits further attention, you may fax it to yourself or anyone else worldwide. (We also do offer text -> voice, ie, the message is read to you, but it is *very* crude and we do not think it would be very useful. It's certainly not the pleasant AT&T "boing" voice , or a HAL-9000 voice saying "Good Morning, Dave, you have three new e-mail messages. Shall I play them now?" It's mainly for the unusual case where you may want to glean more information from a piece of e-mail than the header will provide, and are not near a fax. But it is available if you are desperate and no one else out there is offering this. And yes, we do plan to upgrade this shortly, provided we find the right suppliers and general interest in such a project...) > I had a hack worked out with MobilComm text paging, but it was too > expensive. I'm curious how this worked. Did it pick up the text from the alpha pager and convert it? Sounds interesting! As a more general question, is there really any sort of interest out there in such a service? We keep asking our customers if they have any interest in e-mail -> voice, but the responses we get back indicate that faxing and paging are much more of a concern, and thus we concentrate on that. (And no, we didn't let them hear the thing first; if they did, they'd never want to use it! :) ) To me, the idea of voice transcription of e-mail, especially for depostion to voicemail is very exciting. But each time I approach the topic with the majority of our customers, I get a polite "That's nice", and not much more. Am I missing something? I'd appreciate hearing any comments from people who think that we should concentrate more energy on our voice services (so I can forward it on and prove I'm right! :) ), or if you feel otherwise, perhaps let us know why you think *quality* e-mail to voice is never going to be a popular item. Thanks in advance for any input! Doug Reuben * dreuben@interpage.net * +1 (203) 499 - 5221 Interpage Network Services -- http://www.interpage.net, telnet interpage.net E-Mail Alpha/Numeric Local/Nationwide Paging, WWWFax, and E-Mail <-> Fax Svcs [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you looked at all into how ATT Mail was doing it a few years ago? That might be a good starting place. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 11:13:31 EDT From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada ... Organization: Penn State University Of course the TELECOM DIGEST would now need to be translated to French ;-) Pete Weiss -- Penn State [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You people from State Penn get some odd ideas. I can barely get out an English version of the Digest some days, let alone like my competitors at {Readers Digest} translate each issue into 45 different languages. Aybe-May I-ay ould-cay ut-pay an-ay edition-ay out-ay in-ay ig-pay latin-lay. Enough already! Have a nice weekend all! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #453 ****************************** From ptownson Mon Oct 30 22:41:32 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA13826; Mon, 30 Oct 1995 22:41:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 22:41:31 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199510310341.WAA13826@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #454 Status: RO TELECOM Digest Mon, 30 Oct 95 22:38:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 454 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? (Robert Levandowski) Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? (John Higdon) Re: Area Code Authoritative List (bkron@netcom.com) Re: Which PBXs Have BRIs Compatible With NI-1? (John Romano) Re: AT&T Switch Access via PC (John Romano) Re: Pay Phone TDD (Dave Levenson) Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone (Henry Baker) Re: Cellular Modems (Arthur Knight) Alpha Paging From DTMF Phone (John Gilbert) Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice Systems? (Steve Samler) Telephony Programmer Needed (Dan Monaghan) Caller-ID Interface (m1english@aol.com) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rlvd_cif@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Robert Levandowski) Subject: Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 19:15:54 GMT In randolph@netcom.com (Randolph Fritz) writes: > Having hard some thoroughly rotten customer service experiences with > both ATT and MCI, I recently sat down and thoroughly researched my > available long distance carriers. The choices narrowed to two: > Arcata, a northwest regional carrier, and Frontier, the emerging > national carrier. Unfortunately, it's hard to evaluate service > quality for these firms. So I'd like to hear customer service > experiences with these two firms; tell me what's good (or bad) about > 'em. I've had exceptional customer service from Frontier. They have pleasant phone reps; they handle problems quickly and courteously; billing errors seem uncommon; they're more than willing to put your cellphone on a discounted-LD billing plan (unlike some other companies I contacted); they monitor your calling-card usage, and they really do call you if the usage becomes unusual. Of course, Frontier is also a hometown product here; it used to be RCI Long Distance, a part of Rochester Telephone. Now, Rochester Telephone the LEC is part of Frontier Corp., and Frontier Long Distance, Frontier Cellular (previously NYNEX Mobile/RochesterTel Mobile/Advantage Cellular/ Mountain Cellular), and a few others are part of Frontier Corp. as well. The only problem I've had with Frontier is that they don't accept calling cards issued by Southern New England Telephone, although as far as I know they do take AT&T and Baby-Bell calling cards as well as their own. Frontier's Frontrunner plan is a pretty good deal. Good discounts, and they give you half-off on major (and some minor!) holidays. Frontier is supposedly available everywhere now, due to their acquisition sprees. (Check out http://www.frontiercorp.com to see a map of their companies; it's almost scary how they're growing.) You should be able to force calls through Frontier with the 10xxx code: 10211. Just a satisfied customer... Rob Levandowski News Administrator and UNIX Technical Assistant, UNIX Group University of Rochester Computing Center -- Rochester, New York rlvd_cif@uhura.cc.rochester.edu [Opinions expressed are mine, not UR's.] ------------------------------ Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 18:51:37 -0700 From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? randolph@netcom.com (Randolph Fritz) writes: > Having hard some thoroughly rotten customer service experiences with > both ATT and MCI, I recently sat down and thoroughly researched my > available long distance carriers. The choices narrowed to two: > Arcata, a northwest regional carrier, and Frontier, the emerging > national carrier. Unfortunately, it's hard to evaluate service > quality for these firms. So I'd like to hear customer service > experiences with these two firms; tell me what's good (or bad) about > 'em. I have a T1 to Frontier. Several years ago, I signed up with MCI to do some various telephone projects including IP and some experimental services. I had assumed that since several of my clients had been using MCI (on my recommendation) that I would get some consideration in terms of service quality and price. Hah! The MCI experience was the worst telecom disaster I have gone through in this decade. The fallout was enormous. I missed service commitments, was nickeled and dimed almost to death, could not get the services and signaling that I required, not to mention the threats of lawsuits that ocurred. I "switched" (switching T1 service is a bit more complex than switching dialup carriers -- to say the least) to West Coast Telecommunications through a reseller. What a difference! ALL promises were kept, all signaling worked as advertised, and all prices were exactly as quoted. There were no spurious charges (as with MCI), no price escalations (as with MCI), and no confusing shell games with quantity discounts, etc. (as with MCI). And the prices were VERY LOW -- lower than anything MCI had with all the discounts combined. Somewhere along the line, WCT was bought up by the conglomerate that is now Frontier. A short time ago, the reseller I was working through apparently stopped paying its bills and I ended up cut off for a brief time until I was able to re-establish an account directly with Frontier. But the service is still excellent, the prices are still low, and the company is still easy to deal with. Unlike AT&T, MCI, or any of the "we're so big we don't really need or care about your business" companies, you can reach real people at Frontier who know what they are talking about and know about you and your requirements. I cannot begin to tell you what a pleasure it is to deal with a company that actually provides a great product at a very competitive price -- and cares about its customers to boot. As some of you may know, I am breaking a long-held silence concerning what LD company I actually use. While I won't quote rates (that is between you and your salesperson), I WILL say that Frontier's rates are lower than any of the usual hooey that you see plastered all over the net. In short, I would say that Frontier is definitely a company worth looking into. John Higdon | P.O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | +1 500 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 | http://www.ati.com/ati | ------------------------------ From: bkron@netcom.com (BUBEYE!) Subject: Re: Area Code Authoritative List Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 01:16:53 GMT > I've searched the archives and I've searched at Bellcore. Is there > any authoritative, up to date list of all the North American area codes? Sure thing. Here's one that's up to date as of today, 10/27/95. 201 NEW JERSEY 202 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 203 CONNECTICUT 204 MANITOBA 205 ALABAMA 206 WASHINGTON 207 MAINE 208 IDAHO 209 CALIFORNIA 210 TEXAS 212 NEW YORK 213 CALIFORNIA 214 TEXAS 215 PENNSYLVANIA 216 OHIO 217 ILLINOIS 218 MINNESOTA 219 INDIANA 281 TEXAS 301 MARYLAND 302 DELAWARE 303 COLORADO 304 WEST VIRGINIA 305 FLORIDA 306 SASKATCHEWAN 307 WYOMING 308 NEBRASKA 309 ILLINOIS 310 CALIFORNIA 312 ILLINOIS 313 MICHIGAN 314 MISSOURI 315 NEW YORK 316 KANSAS 317 INDIANA 318 LOUISIANA 319 IOWA 334 ALABAMA 360 WASHINGTON 401 RHODE ISLAND 402 NEBRASKA 403 ALBERTA, YUKON, NW TERRITORIES 404 GEORGIA 405 OKLAHOMA 406 MONTANA 407 FLORIDA 408 CALIFORNIA 409 TEXAS 410 MARYLAND 412 PENNSYLVANIA 413 MASSACHUSETTS 414 WISCONSIN 415 CALIFORNIA 416 ONTARIO 417 MISSOURI 418 QUEBEC 419 OHIO 423 TENNESSEE 441 PUERTO RICO & CARIBBEAN 456 INTERNATIONAL 501 ARKANSAS 502 KENTUCKY 503 OREGON 504 LOUISIANA 505 NEW MEXICO 506 NEW BRUNSWICK 507 MINNESOTA 508 MASSACHUSETTS 509 WASHINGTON 510 CALIFORNIA 512 TEXAS 513 OHIO 514 QUEBEC 515 IOWA 516 NEW YORK 517 MICHIGAN 518 NEW YORK 519 ONTARIO 520 ARIZONA 540 VIRGINIA 541 OREGON 562 CALIFORNIA 601 MISSISSIPPI 602 ARIZONA 603 NEW HAMPSHIRE 604 BRITISH COLUMBIA 605 SOUTH DAKOTA 606 KENTUCKY 607 NEW YORK 608 WISCONSIN 609 NEW JERSEY 610 PENNSYLVANIA 612 MINNESOTA 613 ONTARIO 614 OHIO 615 TENNESSEE 616 MICHIGAN 617 MASSACHUSETTS 618 ILLINOIS 619 CALIFORNIA 630 ILLINOIS 701 NORTH DAKOTA 702 NEVADA 703 VIRGINIA 704 NORTH CAROLINA 705 ONTARIO 706 GEORGIA 707 CALIFORNIA 708 ILLINOIS 709 NEWFOUNDLAND & LABRADOR 710 GOV EMER TELECOM SVC 712 IOWA 713 TEXAS 714 CALIFORNIA 715 WISCONSIN 716 NEW YORK 717 PENNSYLVANIA 718 NEW YORK 719 COLORADO 770 GEORGIA 801 UTAH 802 VERMONT 803 SOUTH CAROLINA 804 VIRGINIA 805 CALIFORNIA 806 TEXAS 807 ONTARIO 808 HAWAII 809 PUERTO RICO & CARIBBEAN 810 MICHIGAN 812 INDIANA 813 FLORIDA 814 PENNSYLVANIA 815 ILLINOIS 816 MISSOURI 817 TEXAS 818 CALIFORNIA 819 QUEBEC 901 TENNESSEE 902 PRINCE EDWARD IS & NOVA SCOTIA 903 TEXAS 904 FLORIDA 905 ONTARIO 906 MICHIGAN 907 ALASKA 908 NEW JERSEY 909 CALIFORNIA 910 NORTH CAROLINA 912 GEORGIA 913 KANSAS 914 NEW YORK 915 TEXAS 916 CALIFORNIA 917 NEW YORK 918 OKLAHOMA 919 NORTH CAROLINA 941 FLORIDA 954 FLORIDA 970 COLORADO [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So ... the above list was correct as of October 27? Good, will it stll be correct on November 1? grin ... PAT ------------------------------ From: John Romano Subject: Re: Which PBXs Have BRIs Compatible With NI-1? Date: 30 Oct 1995 18:51:58 GMT Organization: The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) wrote: > Lars Poulsen said: >> Case in point: We bought a couple of AT&T 8503 voice terminals to play >> with on the public network, but it turns out that these can not be >> made to work with the public service provided out of an AT&T 5ESS >> switch. (According to the support staff at AT&T's PBX group: This >> voice terminal is specifically for use with System 85 and Definity >> PBXs.) This surprising information explains why the manual doesn't >> describe how to program a SPID into the units. > I literally spent an hour and a half on the phone with AT&T (being > conferenced with four people at times) trying to get this same question > answered. Sourcebook says 8503 is ONLY for Definity and System 75/85. > The engineering group that designed the unit said it is for public use > as well because the System 75 is emulating the same protocol as 5ESS. > I took the engineer's word over the customer service droids at > Sourcebook, but hey, it did take the first person I talked to 15 > minutes to even FIND the phone in her computer so who knows what's > going on over there. I have used 8510's and 8520's on Definity G2s, G3V1, and 5ESS custom without any problem. As far as I know there are no 85xx sets that will work with NI-1 (BTW you can convert a 75xx set from custom to NI-1 or vice versa with a ROM change, although I'm not sure whether a conversion kit is generally available). The Definity G3 line just started to support NI-1 as of Version 3 or Version 4. I moved to another company with a Meridian PBX before that conversion was complete so I can't add any details. John Romano Telecommunications Engineer JHU/Applied Physics Laboratory Eyes: smiley@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu Ears: (301) 953-6061 ------------------------------ From: John Romano Subject: Re: AT&T Switch Access via PC Date: 30 Oct 1995 19:05:21 GMT Organization: The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory sean.doherty@channel1.com (Sean Doherty) wrote: > I would like to use the PC and modem on my desk to access a System 75, > G2 and G3 switch. I've tried using Procomm Plus's ATT 4410 emulation > but something is funny with the keyboard. What software/emulations > are other tech's using? Does any body have any suggestions? Is their > an AT&T BBS with these type of utilities? Any thoughts would be > greatly appreciated. AT&T sells a program called Terronova which works very well. We also have an *old* (the highest speed the program will go is 9600) 513 emulator which did the job even though it had no sophisticated features. There's also G3-MA, the high end AT&T management system. BTW, you can't dial directly into a G2 with a terminal emulator program. You need Manager 2 software which can access the procs. John Romano Telecommunications Engineer JHU/Applied Physics Laboratory Eyes: smiley@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu Ears: (301) 953-6061 ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Pay Phone TDD Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 01:55:47 GMT Rito Astorga (ASTOR@lake.ollusa.edu) writes: > I'm trying to locate a TDD that can be used on a pay phone. Ultratec (800-482-2424) makes utility-grade TDD devices for this purpose. They are designed to bolt onto the shelf below the phone in a conventional payphone booth or enclosure. They connect with the phone line, and when a call is placed to a TDD device, the machine unlocks and its keyboard and display slide out in view of the operator. I think this company also offers portable devices suitable for accoustic coupling to a handset on a payphone or a non-pay phone. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that TDD-equipped payphones be provided in buildings where large numbers of payphones are installed. Ultratec makes most of the ones currently installed. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) Subject: Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 15:55:43 GMT In article , dreuben@interpage.net (Doug Reuben) wrote: > Recently, PDIXON.US.ORACLE.COM wrote: >> Does anyone know of a service that will read email messages over the >> telephone? > Well, to be brief, we offer a service which will let you hear the > HEADERS of your messages over the telephone, and if you determine that > the message merits further attention, you may fax it to yourself or > anyone else worldwide. On a recent trip to Europe, a number of my associates were furious that most of the public telephones don't have '*' and '#' touch tone keys that work, and hence they couldn't access their voice mail!! I also understand that other pay phones don't allow touch tones at all, once the call is made, so that revenues from the pay phone are 'enhanced'. Perhaps the first order of business for some of these services is to offer an alternative keying that doesn't require '*' and '#'. Voice recognition to bypass these payphone bandits would also appear to be an important requirement. www/ftp directory: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/home.html ------------------------------ From: Arthur Knight Subject: Re: Cellular Modems Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 10:56:25 CST Pat, I am a relatively new reader of your interesting comp.dcom.telecom. In your recent issue of the digest, there is an inquiry regarding cellular modems etc. There is a company named TELLULAR that makes cellular fax machines all in one case that is used my many emergency responders in Canada. I do not have the name of a U.S. vendor, but perhaps with the name of the company, Mike Manzelli can track them down. I tried to send this info to him directly but could not get it to go. The address shown in the inquiry is "sfd48@ix.netcom.com. Thanks very much for your assistance in this matter. Art Knight artk@hsc.mb.ca ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Alpha Paging From DTMF Phone Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 16:10:32 -0500 Organization: Motorola LMPS The Unipage paging terminal is popular with many paging companies. There is a method of alpha paging entry that is available on some Unipage systems that doesn't require a modem and terminal. Unipage terminal Alpha entry using DTMF. 1. Access pager as you would for a normal numeric message. With a normal page the "*" key should send a dash. The "#" key should send the page and hangup. 2. Enter "**". You are now in Alpha mode. Use the alpha characters on the keypad in the following manner: 3. Press the key that contains the alpha character you want to send. To send an "A", "B" or "C" press the "2" key. 4. Press the "*" to "shift left." Press the "#" to "shift right." The center character is entered without pressing either key. 5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 to send additional characters. 1(Q.Z) 2(ABC) 3(DEF) 4(GHI) 5(JKL) 6(MNO) 7(PRS) 8(TUV) 9(WXY) * 0(Space) # 6. Press "*#" to shift back into numeric mode, if necessary. Example To send the message "Call home.": access the pager dial: **(alpha mode), 2#(C), 2*(A),5#(L),5#(L),0(space),4(H),6#(O),6*(M), 3(E),1(.),(hangup). As you can see -- it is cumbersome, but it works! John Gilbert johng@comm.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 21:59:37 EST From: Steve Samler Subject: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice Systems? My company operates a fax back service where users order news articles. Callers enter six digit story ids where the # key is used as the delimiter between the story numbers. We are getting reports from some users that the system does not recognize the pound key. I know that the other keys work because they are required to enter a user id and a password to enter the system. Doctor offices seem to have more than their fair share of this problem but I also hear reports from others as well. I tested the system down to 60ms dtmf pulse width prior to deployment. System configuration is two T-1s: One via Sprint and one via Nynex. Any ideas out there on this one? ------------------------------ From: kpm@inforamp.net (Dan Monaghan) Subject: Telephony Programmer Needed Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 14:29:40 GMT Organization: InfoRamp Inc. We need a programmer with expertise in telephony technology to program a fax on demand system for us. Please Email me if you can help or point me in the right direction (or call me at 416-390-9699.) Thanks. ------------------------------ From: m1english@aol.com (M1English) Subject: Caller ID Interface Date: 30 Oct 1995 15:33:49 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: m1english@aol.com (M1English) Hi, I am looking for some information regarding interface of Caller ID system with Sun Workstations. I am working on a project using ORACLE on Sun Solaris and the client wishes to have an interface to the Caller ID system so that when a phone call comes in, the number will be sent to the system we are developing and the corresponding information of the caller stored in the database will be displayed automatically. Please email me if you have any information regarding this subject. I really appreciate any help you can give. Thank you very much. M.L. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #454 ****************************** From ptownson Tue Oct 31 00:24:58 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA19319; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 00:18:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 00:18:43 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199510310518.AAA19319@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #455 Status: R TELECOM Digest Tue, 31 Oct 95 00:18:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 455 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson NYNEX Voice Messaging (Stan Schwartz) Trouble in NYNEX Town (Nicholas Spill) Give Me a Break AT&T! (Stuart Zimmerman) Telco Simulator - Design Challenge? (Bill Shields) Station Bell Cutoff (Karl Imhoff) Exchange Radio Telephone Service (Scott Montague) Calling Cards With 950 Access (Matthew D'Elia) Scope.FAQ (John Seney) Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? (Ed Marion) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stan Schwartz Subject: NYNEX Voice Messaging Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 22:07:12 -0500 Forwarded FYI to the Digest From: Mike Pollock[SMTP:pheel@panix.com] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 1995 2:11 PM To: Stan Schwartz Cc: John Malfa Subject: Voice Messaging COMPANY NEWS (sm) provided by Dow Jones/News Retrieval Copyright (c)1995 Dow Jones & Company 10/26/95 Voice Messaging -2-: Table: Voice-Mail Who's Who Several Baby Bells -- relative newcomers to the field -- may be closer to the goal of universal voice mail. Nynex Corp. says it will roll out a new linking service, knitting together residential customers and businesses regardless of what phone systems they use, in the next nine months. In August, it began offering messaging services to a few thousand customers in some New England markets, and it hopes to wire up New York eventually. U S West Inc. expects to offer a similar service early next year in its 14-state region. Nynex and some rival Bells have already had discussions about eventually linking their networks to provide nationwide messaging -- a cheap alternative to long-distance if the caller doesn't need to actually converse. If the Bells win entry into the long-distance business, Nynex says it could begin trials of a nationwide system one year later. Bell Atlantic Corp. in April began testing a "community messaging" service for Montgomery County, Md., which has 300,000 households. So far, organizations generally like the service but family users are reluctant, unfamiliar with the technology and fearful their mailboxes will be stuffed with telemarketing pitches. One customer, Fields Road Elementary School in Gaithersburg, sends out a "voice newsletter" to inform dozens of parents about field trips and other events. Several day camps and community groups use it to contact members, paying 15 cents to 25 cents for each recipient. In California, some 600,000 residential customers of Pacific Telesis Group subscribe to a voice mailbox, and about 126,000 of them use it for voice messaging. FranCine Gadsden of Oakland rents her mailbox for $6.50 a month and frequently messages a dozen friends who get together once a month. Each message costs up to 20 cents. "I tell all my friends who don't have it that they're still in the Stone Age," she says. Voice-Mail Who's Who 1994 VOICE-MAIL MARKET REVENUE SHARE (millions) Octel 20.0% $396 AT&T 16.5 332 Northern Telecom 14.0 274 Siemens-Rolm 7.0 141 Boston Technologies 5.0 106 Centigram 4.5 90 Source: Yankee Group (END) DOW JONES NEWS 10-26-95 6 23 AM Copied from the PRODIGY(R) service 10/28/95 18:59 COMPANY NEWS (sm) provided by Dow Jones/News Retrieval Copyright (c)1995 Dow Jones & Company 10/26/95 Voice Messaging: Efficient And Cheap But Still Too Limited By Gautam Naik Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal When Congress was about to kill the Office of Advocacy at the Small Business Administration last July, Terry Neese wanted to galvanize opposition quickly. So she got on the phone and left a rousing voice-mail message for 4,000 far-flung entrepreneurs -- with a single call. The office survived. "There was no time to send mailings," says Ms. Neese, a lobbyist. "I don't see how this would have happened without voice messaging." Voice messaging -- a sort of e-mail for the voice -- is transforming the humdrum voice mailbox into a potent communications tool. It lets a user leave a message in someone's voice mailbox -- or simultaneously in many people's mailboxes -- without having to converse directly. Properly used, it can be a low-cost, efficient way to communicate. But pushing voice messaging out to the masses has been a quixotic crusade at best. Most of America's 30 million voice-mail users treat their voice mail as a fancy answering machine. And the biggest makers of voice-mail systems use proprietary designs that are incompatible. "All the machines talk a different language. It's a Tower of Babel out there," says Tom Oliver, chief executive officer of VoiceCom Systems Inc., a voice-mail provider. Dennis King, founder of Applied Voice Technology Inc., Kirkland, Wash., says industry leaders such as AT&T Corp., Northern Telecom Ltd. and Octel Communications Corp. used incompatibility originally to hold onto customers. "They didn't want upstarts to enter the market," he says. Now voice-mail companies, spurred by the saturation of their markets and the boom in zap-it-anywhere electronic mail, are trying to undo past mistakes. They are adding bells and whistles, including digital technology, and trying to link incompatible systems. Many customers use voice messaging to avoid wasting time playing phone tag. More than 80% of phone calls don't reach the intended party, studies show. Replying to a message is more efficient with voice messaging, too; the recipient touches a single key and gets the caller's mailbox. "It eliminates 50% of wasted conversation and small talk," says Todd Crockett, a Cleveland real-estate agent and avid user. DuPont Co.'s automotive-finishes unit would typically spend two weeks mailing product updates to its roving sales force. Now the same information is created, "addressed" and sent instantly to the voice-mail boxes of 365 sales reps, many of whom work from home. First Chicago bank saves on long-distance charges by using digital technology to squeeze a 60-second message into a 20-second slot and send it over its internal network. Some 11,000 bank employees exchange more than two million messages a month. General Electric Co. links 150,000 phones in 350 locations with an Octel system. Last year, when a supplier ran out of crucial chips for GE appliances, the chief buyer at GE's appliance division sent out a query to 25 buyers at other GE divisions around the world. The message turned up one division that had a surplus of the scarce parts. Still, makers are a long way from the ultimate "universal" voice-mail system. Eight major players, all with rival designs, hold 72% of the $2 billion-a-year voice-mail-systems market, according to Yankee Group, a research firm based in Boston. The biggest voice-mail providers have bickered for years over how to develop a common design standard. Octel, the No. 1 player with 20% of the market, recently started a new service that bridges rival systems. But all the parties that want to communicate with one another must subscribe to OcteLink, and it's costly: Equipping 10,000 workers would cost an extra $10,000 to $20,000 a month. (END) DOW JONES NEWS 10-26-95 6 19 AM Copied from the PRODIGY(R) service 10/28/95 19:00 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 11:48:05 -0500 From: ntp@netrunner.net Subject: Trouble in NYNEX Town Pat, I much enjoy your newsgroup and am troubled by two telecom issues concerning my otherwise wonderful trip to New York (lived there for seven years and loved it but glad to escape to Miami Beach and live like a human being -- (I shave, I wear socks, I have no pastels or unstructured jackets). 1. The new yellow NYNEX calling card pay phones. Used several in Manhattan (with my MCI Preferred calling card) and after approximatly three minutes got cut off -- preceded by message: "We're sorry, calls to this number are not allowed." Yes, I was calling different numbers -- out of state. In small print beneath the printed instructions in the booth/panel were the words (something like this): For calling cards, collect and 800# calls. Can NYNEX cut off calls on their payphones if you use a competing service? This sort of tactic doesn't bode well if they want to get into the long distance market, does it? 2. Using my Bell South Mobility phone in New York I was informed by a recording that I now need a 4 digit pin number or I could place an "independant operator-assisted call for $1.95 a minute". Really, I have roamed before in Manhattan -- but BSM have not informed their users of the terrors of PIN registration nor do I want to pay "phone sex" rates for a mere long distance call (which I am probably being charged transport for as well). Can't wait to see this next bill from BSM -- transport and roaming charges for listening to these charges/changes! There are several questions embedded here: why have a PIN number if you are roaming? why didn't the cellular companies design more security overtheir analog transmissions in the first place? Is digital transmissions/phones more secure? Why the outrageous operator assited charge? Why couldn't I use my MCI calling card on my cellular calling an 800 access number, and so on? With more choices, more technology and more marketing savvy than engineering savvy this is all getting rather messy isn't it? Thanks for all your info and help. Nicholas Spill ntp@netrunner.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 15:13 EST From: Stuart Zimmerman <0007382020@mcimail.com> Subject: Give me a break AT&T! I have been skeptical lately when I have read claims about sleazy practices from AT&T. Not good old Ma Bell! A call from AT&T soliciting their "Small Business Advantage" program convinced me otherwise. Their representative, Robin from their Camp Hill, PA center claimed that a particular competitor billed for busy and unanswered calls. While most long distance carriers have call supervision and therefore such claims are generally not true, what made her claim so ridiculous is that the competitor she named was SNET (Southern New England Telephone, the local telco). (She was talking about Intrastate calls, although SNET offers Interstate calls through a wholly owned subsidiary. SNET was not part of an RBOC and was one of the first Telcos to offer Interstate long distance.) Come on AT&T, at least make your falsehoods credible! (I had told her that I was a telecommunications consultant!) By the way, I don't usually use SNET for long distance calls, but when I have, they have not billed for unanswered or busy calls. Further, if SNET was not able to detect busies and unanswered calls, how could AT&T? AT&T gets its supervision information from SNET. Thanks for letting me vent! Stuart Zimmerman Fone Saver, LLC "We perform an unbiased analysis of your home or business long distance bill and find ways to save you money! - Guaranteed." 007382020@mcimail.com 1(800)313-6631 ------------------------------ From: bshields@cts.com (Bill Shields) Subject: Telco Simulator - Design Challenge? Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 06:44:07 GMT Organization: CTS Network Services I have been asked to look into the feasibility of creating an interface to a standard telephone (via an RJ-11 jack) which meets the following requirements: 1. Provides sufficient power for standard line-powered telephone. (+5 VDC and +12VDC are available - step-up via DC-DC converter?). 2. Simulates a standard "ring" signal. (115/6.3v transformer connected "backwards"?). 3. Detection of "off-hook" condition (TTL level output). 4. Performs 2-wire to 4-wire conversion (standard ICs available?). 5. Decode DTMF signals (plenty of ICs available - any favorites?). Note that none of this needs to meet any agency approvals since there will be NO connection to the Telco. Any hints, suggestions, pointers to reference materials, app notes, schematics, etc. would be VERY appreciated! So far, I've managed to bury myself in various texts, but I am clearly out of my element here and I have the deep suspicion that I'm trying to re-invent the wheel - and that there may be others out there for whom this would be considered trivial. Can any of you telephony wizards help? I should mention that IF this project actually got to the commercial development stage (and that's a big IF), I could actually afford to PAY someone who could contribute their expertise. In the meantime, I'm trying to determine if this is actually feasible at a reasonable cost OR if the marketing dreamers should be sent back to their cave :-). All input and/or comments welcomed and appreciated! Regards, Bill bshields@cts.com ------------------------------ From: Karl Imhoff Subject: Station Bell Cutoff Date: 30 Oct 1995 16:51:35 GMT Organization: Software AG of North America, Inc My father recently recieved a notice from AT&T requesting that he return the STATION BELL CUTOFF that is listed as being leased to him. The lease stated that there is/was no charge for the equipment, but that they would like to have their equipment back. He has standard residential service in Western Maryland with Bell Atlantic. Any clue as to what this is, where it may be located, or anything else would be appreciated. Thank you, Karl Imhoff, RCDD Email sakxi@sagus.com Software AG of North America, Inc. ------------------------------ From: 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca (Scott Montague) Subject: Exchange Radio Telephone Service Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 01:14:02 GMT Organization: Queen's University at Kingston Reply-To: 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca I work in Northern Ontario during the summers at Missinaibi Provincial Park. This wilderness park is located 88km up a logging road from the small town of Chapleau, located between Wawa and Timmins on Hwy. 101. Needless to say it would be impractical to run a phone wire all that distance for just one customer, let alone costly. So, the provincial park subscribes to Bell Canada's Exchange Radio Telephone Service. This service consists of a VHF or FM Radio Unit which is connected to the building's phone jacks. The radio unit is connected to a Bell supplied antenna, on top of a customer supplied tower. The radio unit is usually powered by a 12 volt 10 amp car battery, but will be replaced with a special power supply for buildings with reliable power. The customer has to apply for a frequency license with the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission, and has to comply with the radio act (no swearing, etc.) as the frequency is publicly accessible. Installation of the service can cost thousands of dollars as a tower is also required at the CO to receive the transmissions. This is in no way related to cellular service. So what happens? When I pick up the phone the radio unit checks to see if the frequency is in use, and if so will squawk *VERY VERY LOUDLY* at me. This is for the people who have four party service. Otherwise, it will open up the frequency and I'll hear a CO generated dialtone. I can dial normally (normally for the switch (an old crossbar switch) that is). When I hang up, I have to remain off the line for several seconds before it actually hangs up (this is to avoid interference causing hang-ups). This service has its problems though. You have to wait a LONG time to redial. If there is interference (sun spots, etc.) you can't use your phone without tricking the radio unit. If you want to speak to someone else on your four party service, you have to use a "push to transmit" button as you are on the same frequency. Of course to ring the other party, you have to go through the operator. You have to bring back the radio unit each time you suspend service (luckily not the power supply or the antenna). If you use a battery, you have to worry about keeping your conversations short and keeping the battery charged and filled with water. Also, it is VERY expensive, with the frequency license, high installation costs, and high monthly costs. On the other hand you have reasonably reliable telephone service where you wouldn't otherwise have any service at all. You get to deal with a special Radio Services branch with two of the best Bell Canada employees (Mary and Gerry), prompt service (once I suggested the power supply for the park they got up there within 2 days... from over 350 km away!), and great repair service (under 2 days for problems at the park, same day for problems at the CO). Plus you also get to use the phone as an excuse to hang up on people or ask the operator to perform special services. It's great! I've also convinced them to put in a Charge-a-call payphone on the same frequency for the use of the campers. This is using a relatively new technology that allows two phone lines per frequency (but not digital). My question for all those Digest readers (and you too Pat) is: does anyone else know if their phone company offers such a service? Does it operate the same? Or is Bell Canada unique in this service, as much of its covering area is remote locations. I'd be interested in hearing anyone else's adventures with this service. Or am I and others in Northern Ontario just living in the past? Scott 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca / Apukwa of 4th \ Scouting: Improving tommorow *Proud to be Canadian* \ Kingston Cubs / through the youth of today. <> ------------------------------ From: tsumatt@ix.netcom.com (Matthew D'Elia ) Subject: Calling Cards With 950 Access Date: 30 Oct 1995 15:04:34 GMT Organization: Netcom Does anyone know which long distance companies still offer calling cards using 950 numbers for access? Matthew D'Elia ------------------------------ From: john@wd1v.MV.COM (John Seney) Subject: Scope.FAQ Organization: MV Communications, Inc. Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 11:02:25 GMT IF you want the complete version of this Digital Scope.FAQ file sent to you automatically, send me (john@wd1v.mv.com) an EMAIL where the subject contains the text "subscribe scope.faq". Or go to the WWW page listed at the end of this file. This file contains the first "page" to give you a sense for it. FALL / 1995 DIGITAL SCOPE.FAQ - VERSION 2.00 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::Date/Time | O O :: :: /\ | :: :: / \ | O O :: :: / \ /\ | :: ::__/ \ / \ /`| O O :: :: \ / \/ | :: :: \ / | O O :: ::1.5 GHz BW \/ 10 GS/s |________:: ::________________________|A B C D :: :: rise 1.5 ns | x x x :: :: fall 4.9 ns | x x x :: ::_________________________________:: ::(*) (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) :: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::: ::: Dear Technologist(s): This Digital Storage Scope.FAQ file contains many (but not all) of your answers to the more "Frequently Asked Questions" re: Digital Storage Oscilloscopes (DSOs). The answers and suggestions come from > a decade of my experience as a DSO sales engineer in Boston, MA. The opinions are mine and represent no company or service - they are meant simply to be helpful, generic, and easy to understand. Thanks to the hundreds of responses to the earlier versions of this FAQ. Feel free to contact me anytime (john@wd1v.mv.com) if you have additional questions or comments. If you want the next version of this file sent to you automatically, send an EMAIL where the subject field contains the text "subscribe scope.faq". \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ KEY ISSUES REVIEWED IN THIS FAQ (in order of appearance) * DSO INDUSTRY TRENDS (Whats happening in DSO technology this year?) * DSO FORM FACTORS (What types of DSOs are there?) * PRIMARY DSO FUNCTIONS (What can DSOs actually do?) * COMPARISONS (How can I best compare various models) * APPLICATIONS (What are the most common DSO applications?) * ADCs (What speed do I really need on each channel?) * BANDWIDTH & TRIGGER (What numbers and functions are right?) * ARCHIVAL & MEMORY (How fast, how deep, and can I get more?) * DISPLAYS (What am I really looking at?) * MEASUREMENTS (How much is my signal changing over time?) * DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSING (How can I obtain more useful information?) * DEMOS & PURCHASING (How can I see and get the DSO I really need?) Best regards, John D. Seney, WD1V Internet: john@wd1v.mv.com 144 Pepperidge Drive AOL: jseney@aol.com Manchester, NH 03103-6150 AX.25 Pkt: wd1v@wb1dsw.nh.usa.na (H) 603-668-1096 TCP/IP Pkt: wd1v@wd1v.ampr.org macnet world wide web home page: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/wd1v Macnet Roster - "Whos Who" of all amateurs using Mac Computers Macnet Test - Amateur Radio Test Simulators Macnet Collection - 10 Disks of Amateur Radio and Scientific Prgms LeCroy Corporation - Test and Measurment Sales Engineering Serving NE Massachusetts, NH, and ME WWW http://www.lecroy.com NASDAQ: (LCRY) (O) 800-553-2769 (F) 603-627-1623 (P) 800-SKYPAGE #5956779 All opinions are my own, including Digital Storage Scope.FAQ To obtain the latest copy automatically, simply send me an EMAIL with "subscribe scope.faq" in the subject field. or: WWW http://beam.slac.stanford.edu/www/library/w3/dso.html ------------------------------ From: ezx@ix.netcom.com (Ed Marion) Subject: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? Date: 28 Oct 1995 12:34:46 GMT Organization: Netcom Does anyone know why Countries like Canada, Bermuda the British Virgin Islands, and the Carribean in general are all accessible from within the USA with a 1 + Area Code + number? All other countries (even Mexico) require 011 + etc. I can't figure this one out either. Guam, a USA territory, requires you dial 011 + etc. to send a FAX. The rates to these countries can be onerous. About $1 min to the Cayman Islands, for instance. So, dialing 1-809 + Cayman Islands seven digit phone number) can rack up some serious charges. I've called Southwestern Bell and asked if we could block 1+ 'international' area codes. Their answer was terse: NO! We have an 800 number with Sprint and turning it off for Canada, Carribean, etc. (or any combination of area codes) is no problem. What gives? A small business or individual that does not have a programmable PBX really has no control, other that blocking all 1+ calls and strict employee training. Recently, a new employee racked up about $120 in LD to Canada (AC 905) because she thought it was in the USA. The same LD time to a USA number would have cost only about $60. For that matter, with NAFTA and all that, why does it cost about 25 cents per minute to call suburban Toronto from Houston during business hours, when it only costs 12 cents per minute to call Seattle which is 500 miles more distant? On 800 inbound, it is even worse ... 56 cents vs 16 cents. Any comments? Best regards to y'all from: Edward Marion, General Manager of EZX Corp. "The EZ-Forms Automation Company" Email: ezx@ix.netcom.com or EZXHOU@aol.com Compuserve: 76350,3111 Americal Online: EZXHOU Mail: EZX Corp, 403 E. NASA Rd., Suite 377, Box 58177, Webster (Houston), TX 77598-8177 USA Voice:713-280-9900 FAX:713-280-0099 BBS:713-280-8180 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that much of what you are complaining about is really just an accident of history. The area codes for North America were in place for many years before the concept of international direct dialing (thus requiring the use of 011 and country codes) was even thought of. It just made 'good sense' in the mind of someone back in the 1950's to put Canada and the USA together in one dialing plan back then. There were politics involved of course, and that is why Canada and the USA got area codes but Mexico did not. Hawaii became part of the USA prior to IDDD so it got an area code also even though it is not connected to our mainland. Guam on the other hand only became dialable after IDDD was installed, so for whatever reason it got a country code rather than an area code. Like Puerto Rico, it is a territory of the USA, but the island known as PR has an area code it shares with other (completely non- related countries) while the territorial island known as Guam has a country code of its own. Midway Island is a US territory and it shares an area code with a US state, namely Hawaii with 808. I would say the two biggest factors in how the numbers came to be assigned as they are over the years are politics (relationships between governments and between various phone companies) and arbitrary decisions made long ago by people who never would have dreamed how extensive our telecom network is today. If it was all to be done over today would things be different in the North American Numbering Plan? I think so. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #455 ****************************** From ptownson Tue Oct 31 13:23:42 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA20738; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 13:09:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 13:09:09 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199510311809.NAA20738@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #456 Status: R TELECOM Digest Tue, 31 Oct 95 01:06:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 456 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice? (bkron@netcom.com) Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice? (Jonathan Elgart) Re: Pin Out Needed For Siliconix DG508 (Bryan Douglas) Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? (Sam Clason) Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? (scotta@prime) Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives (John R. Levine) Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives (Bob Goudreau) Re: Directory Information in Oregon Down? (Danny Burstein) Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone (Henry Baker) Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada ... (Carl Moore) Re: Telecom in China (Andrew Decker) Still More MyLine Improvements (TELECOM Digest Editor) Change of Address Reminder (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 06:20:13 GMT From: bkron@netcom.com Subject: Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice Systems? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Steve Samler writes: > We are getting reports from some users that the system does not > recognize the pound key. I once had a problem like this to deal with. Believe it or not, the problems were occurring because the affected callers were using those phones where the # key was mapped to some other function, such as "memory" or "redial". Despite the fact that the key had # on it, it also said something else right next to it. When pushed, it would not emit the tone at all! We had to change the system to one with a fixed number of digits to eliminate the problem. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 05:49:09 GMT From: us30@netcom.com (Jonathan Elgart) Subject: Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice Systems? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Steve Samler (steve@individual.com) wrote: > My company operates a fax back service where users order news > articles. Callers enter six digit story ids where the # key is used > as the delimiter between the story numbers. We are getting reports > from some users that the system does not recognize the pound key. I > know that the other keys work because they are required to enter a > user id and a password to enter the system. I've had experience with phone systems that do not send out tones on the * and # keys ... unless you first press * # consecutively during your phone call. Then any further uses of these keys, for the rest of that call, will send out tones. No one seemed to understand why the phones would be set up this way, but we all needed to learn this technique so we could page each other. Sorry, I can't remember the brand name of the phone system, but you might suggest this technique to your callers. By the way, these were phones that did not have their own outside phone numbers, but shared lines on one main number, such as in hotels or in office rentals. In our main office, where every desk had its own 703-538 number, we had no such problem. Jonathan Elgart, 448 Ward St., Newton, MA 02159, U.S.A. us30@netcom.com, elgartj@bc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 07:08:04 CST From: bkdougla@rockdal.aud.alcatel.com Subject: Re: Pin Out Needed For Siliconix DG508 EN A0 NC A1 A2 3 2 1 20 19 Key _____________ / \ V1 4 | | 18 GND S1 5 | | 17 V+ NC 6 | | 16 NC S2 7 | | 15 S3 8 | | 14 S6 \_____________/ 9 10 11 12 13 S4 D NC S8 S7 TOP VIEW LCC ------- A0 1 | | 16 A1 EN 2 | | 15 A2 V- 3 | | 14 GND S1 4 | | 13 V+ S2 5 | | 12 S5 S3 6 | | 11 S6 S4 7 | | 10 S7 D 8 | | 9 S8 ------- TOP VIEW SOIC and Dual In Line Source: Siliconix Data Book, DG508A If you can't get a copy of the data sheet from your TEMIC/Siliconix rep let me know. Bryan Douglas Alcatel Richardson, TX voice +1 214 996 5945 fax +1 214 996 6867 ------------------------------ Date: 30 Oct 95 16:28:55 GMT From: sam@nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? In scotta@primenet.com (Scott Atwood) writes: > I have read a few threads regarding the spec's, but all refer to the > BellCore TR-NWT-000030 document. Is this spec available on the net, > or libraries or does one have to shell out the $$ to receive it? > So far I have gathered that after the CW signal is sent the caller-Id > unit must [mute the handset] , send one of the [A,B,C or D] Touch > Tones at which time the CO will send the Caller_ID burst. Are the European and the American CW signals the same (two "knocks" of some length and frequency)? Any European standards on CW/CLI? Who knows, one might even be able to use the same protocoll :-)... Sam http://www.nada.kth.se/~sam, sam@nada.kth.se, +46 701234567 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 20:56:31 GMT From: scotta@primenet.com Subject: Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? Organization: Primenet The Phoenix [AZ] market is suppose to receive the Call Waiting-Caller ID sometime by the end of the year. USWest claims they don't have a "special" box for sale to receive the CW-CID and suggested calling Radio Shack (smile). From reading some past posts, the BellCore TR-NWT-000030 document has the specs. Is this document on the net, at libraries or is it necessary to purchase (big bucks) the doc. So far I've gathered that following the call waiting tone, the "box" must mute the handset, send the _upper_ DTMF digits [A,B,C,D] then receive the Caller-ID info burst. Anybody have any further DETAILED information on this subject? I've also searched the net looking for a manufacture / reseller of a Caller-ID box that can handle the call waiting feature with no luck. Thanks, scotta@primenet.com ------------------------------ From: mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) Subject: Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service Reply-To: mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) Organization: Wilkinson, Barker, Knauer & Quinn In , 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca (Scott Montague) writes: > I work in Northern Ontario during the summers at Missinaibi Provincial > Park. This wilderness park is located 88km up a logging road from the > small town of Chapleau, located between Wawa and Timmins on Hwy. 101. > Needless to say it would be impractical to run a phone wire all that > distance for just one customer, let alone costly. So, the provincial > park subscribes to Bell Canada's Exchange Radio Telephone Service. > My question for all those Digest readers (and you too Pat) is: does > anyone else know if their phone company offers such a service? Does > it operate the same? Or is Bell Canada unique in this service, as > much of its covering area is remote locations. I'd be interested in > hearing anyone else's adventures with this service. > Or am I and others in Northern Ontario just living in the past? There is a similar service available in parts of the United States. Under the FCC's rules it is known as the Rural Radio Service, and it operates on a variety of UHF and VHF frequencies. It is only used in very isolated locations, however, because of the cost. Back in the late 1970s, when I first worked at the FCC, I granted a license to a one-man telephone company who wanted to put in a single radiotelephone in a desert town consisting of a Mormon community. In the US, the telephone company or other provider gets the license for both the base station and the subscriber station. Michael D. Sullivan Email to: mds@access.digex.net Bethesda, MD, USA Also: avogadro@well.com 74160.1134@compuserve.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you talking about Beehive? I think that is its name. One employee/owner and eight subscribers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 15:53:00 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Countries such as the UK and Australia manage to have competing carriers > without making mincemeat of their numbering system, ... Actually, LD competition has hardly affected the US numbering plan at all. There's an optional 10NXX or 101XXXX prefix if you want to use a carrier other than your default, and you dial 00 for a long distance operator. The renumbering in the NANP is due to a large increase in local numbers, which is happening partly because local service is so cheap that lots of individuals and small businesses have multiple phone lines, and partly because flexible interconnection rules have made it technically and economically possible to integrate a lot of stuff into the numbering space that used to be non-dialable, e.g. PBX extensions, pagers, and voice mail boxes. Adding NXX area codes was always part of the plan, it's just happening sooner than originally expected. Most of the screwups are due to myopic PBX owners being unwilling to upgrade their equipment, often because inept or less than honest PBX vendors didn't tell them that it'd be necessary. It's also worth remembering that the UK and Australia each have one local telco (well, 1.01 in the UK) and two LD carriers, one of which is the local telco. In the NANP we have hundreds of LD carriers and thousands of local telcos, which makes the situation somewhat more complex. We also have five times as many people as the UK and probably eight times as many phones. We're now gearing up for local service competition, which will be a lot more difficult, since one of the rules is that you can switch telcos without changing phone numbers. I don't think any other countries are even considering that. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 10:19:53 -0500 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives Chris Gray (Chris_Gray@bcs.org.uk) writes: >> [...] I prefer the "mess" of several competing long distance >> carriers to the neat but painful certainties of being forced to bend >> over and pay the outrageous rates typically charged by monopoly >> state-owned carriers in most other countries. > Countries such as the UK and Australia manage to have competing carriers > without making mincemeat of their numbering system, and I daresay the > same goes for Finland ... the US numbering goulash is the result of > hanging on for too long to what "seemed like a good idea at the time". What precisely do numbering plans have to do with long-distance competition? The Digest did recently conclude a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of fixed-length vs. variable-length numbering plans, which I guess is what the "mincemeat" and "goulash" comments refer to. (Then again, I don't think you can favorably compare the UK to the NANP in the "mincemeat" department -- there are several times as many area codes in the UK, even though its population is one fifth the size of the NANP and it covers about 1/80th of the land area.) But I know of no way in which long-distance competition has affected the numbering plan itself. Indeed, callers need do nothing special at all to invoke their default LD carrier. If they want to choose a non-default carrier for a particular call, they simply dial a special prefix to identify the desired carrier. How exactly does this compare unfavorably to the schemes used in Australia, Finland and the UK? > If you ask me a Flag Day is long overdue. I'm not sure what this means. The U.S. already has a national holiday known as Flag Day, but I don't imagine that was what you were referring to :-). Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: Re: Directory Information in Oregon Down? Date: 28 Oct 1995 21:15:29 -0400 In rsprang writes: > I have been trying to call directory assistance for Oregon for several > days - 503-555-1212. The phone rings, but I never get any answer. > Any idea what is wrong? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No idea at all. I tried it a few > minutes ago and got through on the first ring. A half-ring actually. PAT] Aside from all the other possible causes, keep in mind that more and more long distance carriers (and cellular phone groups, etc.) are re-directing your directory assistance call to a third party, rather than to the local (or distant) RBOC. These can range from full fledged groups to just a couple of folk in a backroom with a cdrom. So ... you might want to try rerouting your DA call through another IXC (interexchange carrier) and hope they'll connect you for real. BTW, when I first pointed this out about a year ago numerous reps from telcos denied that anyone was doing this. Alas, I was right, they were wrong, and the public is suffering as they get old and inaccurate info. (And, needless to say, the person calling DA is -not- getting any reduction in their call charge). dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 05:55:43 GMT From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) Subject: Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone In article , dreuben@interpage.net (Doug Reuben) wrote: > Recently, PDIXON.US.ORACLE.COM wrote: >> Does anyone know of a service that will read email messages over the >> telephone? > Well, to be brief, we offer a service which will let you hear the > HEADERS of your messages over the telephone, and if you determine that > the message merits further attention, you may fax it to yourself or > anyone else worldwide. On a recent trip to Europe, a number of my associates were furious that most of the public telephones don't have '*' and '#' touch tone keys that work, and hence they couldn't access their voice mail!! I also understand that other pay phones don't allow touch tones at all, once the call is made, so that revenues from the pay phone are 'enhanced'. Perhaps the first order of business for some of these services is to offer an alternative keying that doesn't require '*' and '#'. Voice recognition to bypass these payphone bandits would also appear to be an important requirement. www/ftp directory: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/home.html ------------------------------ Date: 30 Oct 1995 22:08:15 GMT From: jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com (Jeffrey Rhodes) Subject: Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone Reply-To: jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. AT&T Easylink Service (aka AT&T E-Mail) has offered text-to-speech conversion of E-Mail over a telephone dialup 800 number for more than five years! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 18:11:56 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada ... Two thoughts about this issue, which is being voted on now -- How does the Quebec-leaving-Canada proposal compare to what Newfoundland was like before it joined the Canadian federation? Also notice that some prefixes have the place name "Ottawa-Hull", and at least some can be reached in either 613 or 819? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As far as phone service is concerned, bear in mind the country of Newfoundland ceased being such back about 1947 (I think that was the year) when it became a Canadian province. The differences in phone service between then and now are so extreme that an accurate comparison is impossible. Even our own experience with Hawaii and Alaska over 35 years ago are hard to compare. They were both assigned area codes shortly after their admission to statehood. Oklahoma and Arizona became states in the early years of this century; whatever limited phone service they had at that time probably just continued in place, so remote from today's telecommun- ications network were they. I had a very old relative who passed away a couple of years ago who had a copy of her birth certificate which stated, quite correctly, that she was born in 1900 in Tulsa, Indian Territory. There were times when this caused some confusion when she needed to produce identification for one reason or another. A couple of places even said to her 'you have to have been born in the USA or be a citizen of the USA' (for whatever they were doing). "Where do you suppose Tulsa is located?" she would ask patiently. "Are you an Indian," they would ask. Dumb, dumb, dumb. State officials offered to give her a revised copy of her birth certificate showing she was born in Tulsa, Oklahoma if she wanted one; but she never did bother with it. As for the confusion bound to result from the Ottawa-Hull 613/819 phone exchange, we don't know at this point what Quebec plans to do with its phone service, or if it intends to make any changes at all. I don't think there will be any changes at all over the next year or two, at least until the formal period of negotiations they have planned are completed. I guess we will know the results soon, and I for one refuse to give an opinion or stick my nose into it. People in the USA should butt-out and let them attend to their own affairs up there. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 10:22:56 GMT From: ADECKER@bear.com (Andrew Decker) Subject: Re: Telecom in China > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am told phone service in China is > expanding and growing at an incredible pace. Is that correct? PAT] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've heard a lot of wild statistics > tossed around on this. Some are saying new phones are being installed > in China at the rate of five or six to every similar installation in > the USA ... that there are more new installs there in a month than > the entire USA has in six months. True or false? Any solid figures? The Government of China has announced various medium- to long-term plans to extend and upgrade China's communications infrastructure. While the details vary depending upon the sector (and to some extent the report), in general, the Government is attempting to increase the aggregate number of access lines by 10+ million per year (essentially building an RBOC every year!) and to roll-out wireless (GSM and other services) throughout the country. In order to speed the development of this infrastructure, the Government recently created a second national carrier called Lian Tong (also known as China United Telecommunications Corp. or Unicom). Lian Tong is backed by the Ministries of Power; Electronics Industry; and Railways and has about 16 lesser shareholders including a number of state controlled financial and industrial concerns. Lian Tong has been authorized to build wireline and wireless networks throughout the country. To date, they have sponsored GSM networks in a number of cities and are beginning to attempt to organize groups to develop local exchange wireline networks and long-distance backbones in the various provinces. Both Lian Tong and the Ministry of Posts and Telecom (MPT) are doing deals at a furious rate to exploit opportunities. Foreign ownership of the assets and involvement in the operations of networks is still technically prohibited. However, there are an increasing number of innovative financing and operating arrangements that effectively circumvent the prohibition. For more information I recommend International Technology Consultants (telephone 301-907-0060) who publish a monthly newsletter on Chinese telecom developments. Pyramid research also publishes an Asian newsletter that includes China. Andrew Decker Tel: 212 272 3787 Senior Managing Director Fax: 212 272 3092 (Office) Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. 800 728 8950 (Personal U.S.) 245 Park Avenue 510 927 2557 (Personal Intn'l) New York, NY 10167 email: adecker@bear.com U.S.A. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 08:12:03 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Still More MyLine Improvements Don't those people *ever* get done making improvements to their product? Their latest addition to the MyLine 800 number software is something called 'voice screening'. Here is how it works: Someone calls your MyLine 800 number in the usual way, and they get your recorded announcement to 'please stand by while call is transferred to me' (or whatever you choose to say for the greeting). Instead of it just ringing through to your normal number or your priority call number as in the past (or going to voicemail on no answer) now if you wish, you can use 'voice screening' before answering the call. The system asks the caller to state his name. While he is waiting, the system rings you and the name of the caller is given. You then have the choice of accepting the call, or pressing a key on your phone and sending the call to voicemail, with the caller being told you are unavailable right now. The caller hears none of this of course; he is just waiting on hold while you decide (based on his name or whatever he recorded as his 'name') whether to take the call or not. This is in addition to the improvements announced a couple weeks ago of 'virtual call waiting' and 'call conferencing'. So far as I know, MyLine is the only 800 service to offer call waiting on an 800 line. Now, if they would only pass along the ANI they get, converting it to Caller ID for the outgoing side of the call ... hmmm ... Steve, is that a good idea or not? Steve Betterly at Call America informed me there is no shortage of 800 numbers where they are concerned; there is still enough to assign one promptly to each new customer of MyLine service. If you prefer, you can have a regular number in the 415/408 area code instead. This is for the benefit of people who get a lot of international calls where an 800 number might be hard or impossible to dial. You can check out earlier messages in this Digest about the benefits of MyLine 800 service or send email to: betterly@callamer.com and request complete details. Billing to credit cards is okay. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 08:33:50 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Subject: Change of Address Reminder Please make certain you have changed the address for TELECOM Digest and comp.dcom.telecom effective at this time. All correspondence to the Digest is to be sent to: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu. By 'all correspondence' I mean all editorial submissions, all list maintainence requests; all 'not for publication' comments, etc. Usenet news admins: pointers for the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup should also refer to the above address. Please make the needed changes in your records today. ----------------------- Just a further reminder also that beginning this past week, ALL outgoing stuff to the newsgroup is authenticated with encrypted approval meaning spam will bounce. Cancelbots operating at various locations continually watch the comp.dcom.telecom newsfeed for stuff which does not belong there -- meaning it does not have my encrypted approval -- and cancels it out with cancel messages sent out immediatly to a few very well connected sites. The spammer or other miscreant poster is not notified, nor is his submission returned. He gets no warnings, no second chances. The item in question does come to me for manual review of course, in the event I want to override the cancelbot and make the item available, which is unlikely considering most of what gets caught that way. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #456 ****************************** From ptownson Wed Nov 1 00:13:35 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA03381; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 23:55:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 23:55:20 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511010455.XAA03381@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #457 Status: R TELECOM Digest Tue, 31 Oct 95 23:55:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 457 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Report From China (tallmendinger@pyr.com) Newfoundland Telephones Before 1949 (Nigel Allen) Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada .. (Chris Gettings) Licenses and Regulation (khh@access4.digex.net) When Was the Coiled Phone Cord Invented? (Michael Moore) Private Line No. 9 Out Now; No. 8 Free Upon Request (Tom Farley) Split-T or Fractional T-1 Device w/ocu/bri Interfaces (Doug Neubert) Trying to Get Info From 604-555-1212 British Colombia, No Go (Robert Casey) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 16:28:29 GMT From: tallmendinger@pyr.com Subject: Telecom Report From China Some more detailed information on Telecom in China based on our own research: Explosive Growth in China's Telecom Markets China's telecom sector is growing at an unprecedented speed. In 1994 alone, China added 10.8 million new telephone subscribers and nearly one million new lines of trunk switching, installed nearly 26,000 kilometers of fiber optic lines, interconnected its cellular networks nationwide, cut over a national digital data network, and completed construction on its first major SDH fiber optic trunk line. Liberalization is providing an additional push to China's telecom market, and will be a major factor driving market growth during the 1995-2000 period. Newly licensed second network operator China Unicom and datacom services provider Ji Tong are already implementing large-scale network construction projects which will change the competitive face of the Chinese fixed and wireless voice and data communications markets. The MPT is investing a total of $9.5 billion (RMB 80 billion) in 1995. Plans call for China's switching capacity to increase by 14 million lines by year-end 1995. During the first six months of 1995, China's exchange capacity had already grown by 7.48 million lines to reach a total 56.25 million lines. The MPT is targeting 12 million new telephone subscribers this year, up from 10.8 million and 5.8 million in 1994 and 1993 respectively. Annual growth in telecom traffic averaged 45.9% during the 1991-1994 period. Nevertheless, overall teledensity is extremely low, reaching only 2.3% at the end of 1994 -- leaving plenty of demand for expanded networks and services. Transmission construction also continues to gather speed. China is completing construction on 22 fiber optic trunk transmission systems by the end of 1995, under the Eighth Five Year Plan. Already, work has begun on the construction of 16 new SDH trunk lines, as part of the Ninth Five Year Plan. SDH technology (up to STM-16) has already become the de facto equipment standard in MPT long-haul transmission procurement practices. Moreover, provincial transmission systems are increasingly coming to rely on SDH technology. This growth translates into tremendous opportunity for foreign investors and telecom equipment vendors. Every major foreign telecom equipment supplier is rushing in to join up with Chinese manufacturers in joint venture production agreements, while an increasing number of foreign operators are investing in telecom projects in exchange for revenue sharing agreements. Competition Spurs Growth and Opportunities Changes in China's regulatory policy have put an end to MPT's monopoly on telecom services. Last year two new entrants were given the green light to begin telecom services: China United Telecommunications Corporation (Unicom) and Ji Tong Communications Corporation have already begun to irrevocably alter the competitive landscape of China's telecom market. Unicom, which is backed by the powerful Ministry of Electronics Industry, Ministry of Railways and Ministry of Electric Power, has already cut over GSM digital cellular networks in Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Guangzhou, with a combined capacity of roughly 80,000 subscribers. The new operator's extensive plans include the construction of a nationwide VSAT network, a national long distance voice network, and extensive submarine fiber optic transmission links along the coast of China. Unicom has already invested $84.3 million in cellular networks and will invest an additional $722 million to build out GSM networks in 16 additional cities this year. Ji Tong has made a splash in China's data communications market through its ambitious Golden Projects initiatives. The company's "Golden Bridge" network has already begun installation and will provide high speed data communications services across China by the end of the decade. Hughes is supplying the first round of VSAT terminals for the Golden Bridge, which will interconnect with existing data communications networks throughout the country. The liberalization in telecom services has opened up new opportunities for foreign carriers looking to break into China. Already, many foreign operators, such as BellSouth, GTE, Hong Kong Telecom, NYNEX, Singapore Telecom, and Sprint, have signed MOUs and cooperation agreements in China to serve as technical consultants, financial backers and network integrators for both MPT and non-MPT operators. While foreign companies are still prohibited from holding equity stakes in telecom operating ventures in China, a growing number are involved in revenue-sharing agreements with Chinese operators in exchange for investment and technical assistance. Cellular Services Climb to New Heights China added more new cellular subscribers last year than all of Southeast Asia combined, reaching a total of 1.56 million subscribers. A seemingly insatiable demand for cellular services will continue to drive growth in this lucrative segment of the market. Pyramid expects an additional 1.7 million subscribers to sign on during 1995. Cellular subscribership will reach over 15 million by the year 2000, with a nearly equal distribution of analog and digital subscribers. MPT's analog TACS-A and TACS-B networks now permit interprovincial roaming; the two networks will soon be interconnected, allowing for national automatic roaming. At the same time, GSM networks are springing up across the country, with both new operator Unicom and China's local and provincial MPT subsidiaries racing to gain market share. Significant drops in handset prices and cellular tariffs are also spurring the growth in subscribership. While the TACS infrastructure market has been dominated by Motorola and Ericsson, the emergence of the GSM digital standard in China is providing other vendors the opportunity to enter the market. CDMA, while still not a fully developed technology, has potential to capture some of the market as well over the next several years, particularly if it is successfully deployed in nearby Hong Kong. Provincial Level Telecoms Networks Increasingly Important Telecom Markets in China also provides detailed analyses of telecom activities in each of China's 30 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions. Provincial-level Posts & Telecommuncations Administrations have become an increasingly powerful independent force driving the development of China's telecom market. Provinces and municipalities are taking on increased responsibility for funding, planning, installation, and interconnection of networks. Particularly in the prosperous coastal provinces such as Guangdong and in cities like Beijing and Shanghai, new technologies such as SDH transmission, GSM cellular networks, ATM switching, and high speed digital data networks are being tested out well in advance of their adoption at the national level. Provinces and municipalities are also forging links with foreign operators and suppliers independently of the MPT; a case in point is Beijing Telecommunications Administration's 1994 agreement with Hong Kong Telecom, which calls for HKT to invest nearly $260 million in the expansion of Beijing's GSM network and the construction of a fiber optic link between Beijing and Hong Kong. Investment from the provincial PTAs themselves is becoming increasingly significant: Guangdong will invest $1.26 billion in telecom network development in 1995, while Beijing and Shanghai will invest $640 million and $470 million respectively T E L E C O M M A R K E T S I N C H I N A (US$ 2,850), a new report from Pyramid Research, Inc. (available Dec 1995), presents a comprehensive view of telecom equipment and services markets in China. This new report provides detailed information and analysis of market and investment opportunities, spending and development plans, new liberalization and reforms in the services sector, competitive strategies of foreign and local suppliers and operators, new service and technology trends, and equipment market growth opportunities by sector. For further information on this report or other information (newsletters, reports and consulting) on telecommunications in developing countries please contact info@pyr.com Todd Allmendinger Senior Associate Pyramid Research, Inc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 14:01:50 -0500 From: Nigel Allen Subject: Newfoundland Telephones Before 1949 Organization: Internex Online Carl Moore asked about telephone service in Newfoundland before 1949. In the capital city of St. John's and the rest of eastern Newfoundland, service was provided by an investor-owned company, Avalon Telephone Co. Ltd., which took its name from the Avalon Peninsula. I think Avalon was partly owned by Bell Canada. Around 1970, the company changed its name to Newfoundland Telephone, and a subsequent reorganization turned Newfoundland Telephone into a wholly-owned subsidiary of a new holding company, NewTel Enterprises. NewTel is partly owned by BCE Inc., the former Bell Canada Enterprises. In the rest of Newfoundland, telephone service was provided by the Newfoundland government's Department of Posts and Telegraphs. When Newfoundland joined Canada, the telecommunications side of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs was turned over to Canadian National Railways, which also received the never-very-healthy Newfoundland Railway. CN's telecommunications division provided telegraph and Telex service throughout Newfoundland, and telephone service within the areas not served by Avalon Telephone/Newfoundland Telephone, until 1980, when a new CN subsidiary, Terra Nova Telecommunications Inc., took over the CN Telecommunications operation in Newfoundland. (This was at the same time that Northwestel, originally a CN subsidiary, took over the CN Telecommunications operations in the Yukon, the western half of the Northwest Territories, and northern British Columbia, and that CNCP Telecommunications was formed from the merger of Canadian Pacific's telecommunications division and the bulk of CN Telecommunications.) Terra Nova Tel was run from Gander, a small Newfoundland community best known for its international airport, although the company's president -- who was also the head of CN's communications division -- was located in what had been the CN Telecommunications headquarters at 151 Front St. West in Toronto. Terra Nova Tel also provided Telex service in St. John's and elsewhere in Newfoundland, and operated Newfoundland's last telegraph office in St. John's until it was closed in 1983. These services were provided in connection with CNCP Telecommunications, later Unitel Communications Inc. About five years ago, Terra Nova Tel was purchased by Newfoundland Telephone, which is now the only local exchange carrier in Newfoundland. (At some point in the 1960's, Bell Canada sold its Labrador operations to Newfoundland Telephone.) After the sale, Unitel set up Unitel Newfoundland in partnership with Fortis, an electricity company. As for regulation: I assume that the Newfoundland government regulated Avalon Telephone before 1949, although I do not know if the government did so directly or through an independent regulatory tribunal. Certainly there was a Public Utilities Board in Newfoundland after 1980, and probably much earlier. As for the areas served by the Department of Posts and Telegraphs prior to 1949, the telephone and telegraph rates would have been established directly by the government. After 1949, CN Telecommunications and Terra Nova Tel would have been regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and its predecessors (the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada and later the Canadian Transport Commission). A few years ago, a Supreme Court of Canada decision placed Newfoundland Telephone under federal jurisdiction, so authority for regulating the company was transferred from Newfoundland's Public Utilities Board to the CRTC. Nigel Allen (who has never visited Newfoundland) 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M6G 1V3, Canada Telephone (416) 535-8916 Internet: ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 18:24:18 -0700 From: gettings@econnect.net (Chris Gettings) Subject: Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada .. As you may already know, the referendum in Quebec resulted in a "Non" vote by a margin of about 1%. So, for the time being, Quebec will remain part of Canada. Some view this as part of an inexorable slide to independence for Quebec, as the vote resulted in more "Oui"s than at the last vote. Expect another referendum in two or three years. Christopher C. Gettings gettings@econnect.net www.econnect.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I read today that as the vote was more throoughly counted and audited the margin was down to less than one percent ... more like a quarter of a percent. Personally I think the separation would be tragic, particularly for the provinces to the east which would be cut off from the rest of Canada. Here in the USA I don't think any such thing could happen; I do not think there is any provision whatsoever for a state in the union to decide to withdraw from the country although I suspect in a couple of the western states there is a prevailing attitude by many of the citizens that they would if they could. I know that on a few occassions officials in Illinois have suggested they would like to see the City of Chicago separated from Illinois and made into a state of its own to reduce the dreadful drain on the state treasury caused by Chicago in areas of welfare, human services, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: khh@access4.digex.net Subject: Licenses and Regulation Date: 31 Oct 1995 18:46:45 GMT Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Following is an excerpt from the book *Federal Broadband Law* by John Thorne, Peter W. Huber, and Michael K. Kellogg. All of chapter 1 can be seen at http://khht.com/huber/home.html. --------- 1.4 Entry(41) Who will be permitted by the government to build broadband networks? Given how loudly government has been promoting the "information superhighway," this question might seem idle. It isn't. Entry into the broadband business is strictly controlled through a labyrinth of franchise procedures and license requirements. The franchising of communication technologies is not new. Soon after the printing press arrived in England, Henry VIII decided that the risks of sedition required control by the Crown. When it became impossible to limit the number of presses, the government tried its hand at licensing books.(42) Licensing today is always undertaken in sorrow, not anger. It is a matter of necessity.(43) Franchises are required by the laws of physics, it is said: spectrum is scarce. Or by the laws of economics: monopoly is cheaper and more efficient than competition. Or by the inherent scarcity of orbital slots in which to park satellites.(44) Or by logistics: franchises are needed to protect the public from the inconvenience of too much digging in the public streets. When transmitters, wires on telephone poles, underground conduits, or simply our patience are in short supply, and under monopolistic (or at best oligopolistic) control, the government must step in to ration and dole out the poverty, protesting its reluctance loudly as it does so. And often protesting all the way to the bank. Government entities that issue licenses have noticed that they can collect pay-offs for doing so.(45) With telephone service, the most common model is a local or state tax on receipts. With cable, franchise fees are more commonly paid in cash or kind-free wiring for schools, television studios for favorite charities, free TV time for city officials, and so on.(46) The federal government recently began cashing in directly, by selling spectrum for wireless telephones at auction to the highest bidders, or to bidders judged to be most diverse, marginalized, or politically correct.(47) Antitrust law and the First Amendment have been the two main federal tools available to sanitize the process.(48) The inherent inefficiency (or worse) of the franchising process has grown clearer with each new advance in broadband technology. Virtually every locality in the country now has not one wireline network, but two; wireless alternatives are advancing and multiplying, as well. With digital broadband technology, every network is capable of carrying voice, video, and data, or soon will be. On the constitutional front, government clearly could never get away with licensing paper-and-ink presses the way it currently licenses electronic ones. Press licenses were effectively abolished in the United States by the ratification of the First Amendment in 1791. For most of this century, courts distinguished celluloid and emulsion, radios and tuners, photons, phosphors, fiber-optic glass, and countless other electronic substitutes for ink and paper. Franchises, licenses, and permits are still the norm for these media, not the exception. But licensing remains the quintessential prior restraint; it creates countless opportunities to chill or to censor by way of bureaucratic wink, nudge, or frown. The First Amendment presumption is that other, post hoc means to any legitimate regulatory ends are strongly favored, if they can be concocted in any reasonable way. They can be. The old rationales of scarcity and natural monopoly no longer persuade. The clamor of people who want to deploy new electronic presses faster than regulators can process their permits is reaching a crescendo.(49) Property rights and anti-trespassing rules are needed in telecommunications, as in all other free markets. Licenses are not. [Endnotes 41 through 49 can be seen at http://khht.com/huber/home.html.] -------- Copyright 1995 John Thorne, Peter W. Huber, and Michael K. Kellogg. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. All rights reserved. Electronic copies of this document may be distributed freely, provided that this notice accompanies all copies. ------------------------------ From: mmoore@tad.eds.com (Michael Moore) Subject: When was the Coiled Phone Cord Invented? Date: 31 Oct 1995 17:45:46 GMT Organization: EDS Technology Architecture I wondering if anyone has any info about when the COILED telephone cord was invented/patented and/or when it came into common use. I'm doing some research and have not been able to find an answer to this question anywhere else. I will also take suggestions on where to look for this info. Thanks in advance, mmoore@tad.eds.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All the old 'French style' phones from the 1930-40 era (with the little fingers on the top on which the reeiver rested) had straight cords. Straight brown *cloth* cord was used a lot in the same time period, with black rubber cord beginning to be prevalent around 1940. Of course, in those days, phone instruments lasted for *years and years and years* without ever needing repair of any kind, so maybe they started using rubber instead of cloth earlier but were still phasing out the older phones (with cloth cords) in 1940. The early 500 model phones from around 1950 or so also had straight cords at first, but I recall seeing one with a coiled cord in the early 1950's. I was only a child; I cannot remember where I saw it. In the early to middle 1960's all new installs used the 500 desk set with coiled cords however there were still plenty of the old 'French style' phones around as well. The ones that had never needed repair to the handset still had straight cords but those which had new or replacement receivers nearly all had coiled cords. Payphones in the 1950's began getting their straight cords replaced by coiled cords, but armored cable from phone to handset on payphones did not appear until sometime in the 1970's with any regularity, which was about the time the three-slot (5/10/25 coins) payphones began getting phased out and they started putting trapdoors on the coin return chute to keep people from getting inside the phone with bent coat hangers to fetch the money back out before the operator had a chance to hit the 'collect or return' buttons on the switchboard. I found a real gem a few years ago. A friend who earns his living doing repairs and maintainence to tower (steeple) clocks, bells and carillons took me along to help him re-align the hands on the clock in the tower of Holy Family Church. He also cleaned up and fixed the gears on the bell mechanism which made the bell chime on the hour and quarter-hours. Holy Family Church was constructed in the 1860's and the notation on the clock machinery in the tower said it had been installed by the 'Southwick Clock and Bell Company' of England in the year 1921. The company had gone out of business in 1928, but their schematics and documentation file for those old tower clocks had been passed along and the docs for HF Church were finally located in the archives of the Timex people in Chicago. With those in hand he did a pretty good job of getting the clock and bells restored. But I digress ... HF Church had a 1A2 system. Six button five line phones with a hold button. Three or four outside lines in rotary hunt, with one of the buttons marked 'ICOM' and a dial intercom with a bunch of stations. *Way up there*, in that clock tower, an *ancient* key phone still in working order. Dial tone on all the lines, the lamps illuminating properly, the hold button working, etc. Straight -- not coiled -- rubber cord to the handset, the little round barrel-like buttons instead of the square ones used now, a clear colored (rather than red as used now) hold button, etc. Taking the cover off the punch down block mounted on the wall nearby I found a note handwritten in the most exquisite penmanship from a phone installer long since dead and forgotten telling others who might come after him what he had done: "Six pairs from here terminate on the IT in the basement at the rectory. House pairs on row two." Signed with his name, the notation "Illinois Bell" and the date in May, 1931. Like President Carter, I had lust in my heart. Oooh, I wanted that phone! The other phones on the system were much newer. It looked to me like no one had used that phone for at least 20 years or perhaps longer. In the basement of the rectory next door to the church, the phone box had a note in the same hand- writing telling phone men of the future that "Six pairs on row two go to Sexton's phone in tower clock." (and furthermore that) "Wabash cable 239, pairs 16-24 multipled to (some nearby addresses). Fifty pair cable to the new building." Again his name, and the 1931 date. The 'new building' was apparently the boy's high school Holy Family Church built around that time. I found a 'new' (1980-ish) key phone for them and swapped it for the 1930's model, which about sixty years later was still working fine. That's how Western Electric made things back then. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Farley Subject: Private Line No. 9 Out Now; No. 8 Free Upon Request Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 11:46:31 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) The November-December issue of _private line_ (No. 9) is now out. Send me four dollars if you want it. Issue number 8 is now my sample issue - send me a snail mail address if you want a free copy of that. I'll get your request in the mail in about a week, just as soon as I get my subscribers' copies posted. November-December contains a look at an AT&T cable station, an update to the Digital Telephony Bill, an index to volume 2 of _private line_, a review of Def Con III and an article on propagation basics of point to point microwave systems. Among other things. It's my best effort so far and it contains 17 photographs. September-October, the free sample issue, contains a long article introducing Canadian telecom. It also has an article on Outside Plant. The feature article was written by Damien Thorn on cellular test mode scanning. Its four parts are: Accessing Diagnostic Modes, Oki Test Mode Commands, Motorola Diagnostics, and a Motorola Test Mode Command Summary. _private line_ is a hardcopy, alternative publication about the telephone system. Text of back issues 1-6 are on line. Issues 7 and 8 will be when I get a little more time to convert them to ASCII. Gopher or FTP to: etext.archive.umich.edu/pub/Zines/PrivateLine Another useful URL is: gopher://gopher.etext.org:70/11/Zines/PrivateLine Subscriptions are $27.00 for six issues per year. My address is: private line 5150 Fair Oaks Blvd. #101-348 Carmichael, CA 95608 CA USA I don't take credit cards but I can bill you. Back issues are $5.00 apiece. E-mail me if you want a list of their table of contents. Corrections and comments are always welcome. Submissions are also encouraged. Voice is (916) 488-4231. My fax number is (916) 978-0810 and my e-mail address is privateline@delphi.com Thank you! Tom Farley ------------------------------ From: dougneub@ix.netcom.com (Doug Neubert) Subject: Split-T or Fractional T-1 Device w/ocu/bri Interfaces Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 13:03:27 GMT Organization: Netcom I am looking for a vendor who makes a Split-T or fractional T-1 device that is drop and insert and will give me my choice of cards. It would have XN-56/64k V.35/449/530 card. Also an OCU-DP card w/5 ports. Last but not least a BRI drop point. If anyone knows who makes this box please drop me a line or E-mail me. Thanks, Doug Neubert Telsource Corp. Cleveland, Ohio 800-788-8824 x305 dougneub@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) Subject: Trying to Get Info From 604-555-1212 British Colombia, No Go Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 00:26:45 GMT I needed to find out the phone number of some company in British Columbia, "Softlanding Software". Dialed 604-555-1212 and got a robotic voice asking what city, then a pause which I said a puzzled hello (hoping it really was human), then it asks for the "listing". I said Softlanding Software. Machine hands me off to an actual human, who demands "what city". I don't know what town this company is in I explain. "Can't you just do a search for "Softlanding Software". "No, sorry, that's impossible", "What do you mean impossible, how many "Softlanding Software"'s are there in your province?! She says "probably only one, but I need the city for it". I'd have to search the entire province." I say, well do it. "The system doesn't permit that. She compares it to searching the entire state of Washington. I didn't (and still don't ) see what the problem is, other than poor software. A database program should let one hunt down info by various different incomplete inputs. What this Canadian phone company (is it some sort of government agency up there? THAT would explain it!) seems to have is an exact equivalent of a physical card file (like what libraries used to do) indexed by city. I could understand them not being able to find an entry in an unknown city if it meant searching thru thousands of paper cards, but a computer should be able to handle this no problem. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #457 ****************************** From ptownson Wed Nov 1 01:25:48 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA07425; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 01:15:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 01:15:15 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511010615.BAA07425@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #458 Status: RO TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Nov 95 01:15:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 458 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson DejaNews - Search the Past Year's USENET Traffic (via John Shaver) Big Brother - He's Everywhere! (Michael J. Kuras) Chicago Ameritech Cellular PINs Required? (Andrew C. Green) Telecom History Web Site (Ken McCarthy) Telephone Key-Pad Standards (Andy Cobham) Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager (Bruce Albrecht) GH337 and Mobile "Modem" (Antnio Sousa) BONeS vs. CACI Network Modeling Question (James Kovaly) Physical Layer Testing For Fiber Optic Transmitters and Receivers (Mirman) GPT and Ringmaster (Jaap Doogers) Another UK Number Change (Clive D.W. Feather) Head of French Hacker Group Was Secret Service Agent (JeanBernard Condat) ETSI Standards Needed (Patricio Boric) Specs For HM9102A Telephone IC (David Nyarko) Towing Pirates (Gideon Yuval) Cable Services License Renewal Help Wanted (Joe Mortz) Multiple Phones on Cellular Line (Lisa R. Owen) New Area Code Shows Up on Caller ID (David A. Cantor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shaver, John Subject: FW: DejaNews - Search the Past Year's USENET Traffic Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 07:48:00 PST Passed along FYI to the Digest. John From: queens-list-owner Subject: DejaNews -- search the past year's USENET traffic Date: Monday, October 30, 1995 10:05AM From: Keith Bostic Reply-To: queens-list@netcom.com Ever wonder who some slimebucket is when he crawls out from under his rock and splatters some trash on the mailing list you read? Well, now ya can just go and see what he's been up to elsewhere on USENET. DejaNews is a searchable archive of the last year's USENET news all crossreferenced and indexed for your research use. http://www.dejanews.com From: http://www.dejanews.com Scope and size of DejaNews DejaNews has the largest collection of indexed archived Usenet news available anywhere. While WAIS servers typically contain only articles from a limited number of newsgroups, DejaNews gives you access to most of the usenet postings (articles posted to groups that match alt.*, soc.*, talk.* or *.binaries are excluded) in the last month. This amounts to over 4Gbytes of searchable data. Selected groups have an extended history of up to a year. As resources allow, we will plan to eventually offer an entire year of history on all of the groups (except the excluded ones described above). If you'd like to have the full-year history of your favorite group available now, just send us email to groups@dejanews.com and let us know. We'll pull the last year's articles for that group off the archive and add it to the database. Once it has been added, you'll get an email confirmation that it's now available. Performance DejaNews is extremely efficient and fast. Even searches that span huge quantities of data are finished on the server in a few seconds. Reliability DejaNews has server redundancy and backup to ensure that you always have efficient access. If you can reach the backbone, you can reach DejaNews. DejaNews is dedicated to maximum uptime and we have the resources to back up that commitment. Target your search to get what you want, fast and easy with these powerful search and retrieval options. Pattern Match Searches for articles that contain words that match a pattern using shell-like pattern matching. eg: doct* finds articles containing any of the following words: doctor, doctors, doctrine... Filtered You can limit the results of your searches to a subset of the database that satisfy limiting conditions (newsgroups, author, posting date). Topic thread Retrieves the entire thread of articles on a particular topic. First you find an article of interest using a regular article search, then you can retrieve the entire thread so you can put the article in context and see what others have to say about the topic. Author profile Helps you determine the credibility of the author of an article by showing you a history of their posts and useful statistics on their posting habits. Time sensitivity The latest news on a particular subject is often much more important than older news. DejaNews has the capability of weighting recent documents as more important so that they will take precedence over older documents in the results of a search. See the "how to" guides for help on putting these features to work for you. What is Usenet? Usenet is a worldwide electronic public message service that hosts over 9,000 topic-specific newsgroups. Typically, users post questions and the Usenet community responds - exchanging everything from artichoke soup recipes to tips on installing a web server. Researchers have turned to Usenet to identify experts or uncover areas where research is needed. Businesses and entrepreneurs have found that Usenet provides a unique opportunity to improve customer relations and increase visibility by posting answers in their area of expertise. Companies have found it a valuable tool for recruiting employees and monitoring trends and markets. But have you thought about how Usenet could help you plan the perfect vacation, or help you get a good deal on a big-screen TV? How DejaNews helps you use Usenet: The good and bad news is: Usenet has proven so useful and popular since it began in 1979, that the traffic of messages had grown to over 80 megabytes per day. With this much potentially useful, but practically overwhelming amount of information, one needs a system that provides the capacity and functionality to effectively search the news. DejaNews is this system. ---------------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And personally, I think it is a really great service. There is the usual complaining and whining from the privacy freaks about how it is such a terrible thing that someone is able to track someone else's postings and presumably make a profile of that person, but to my way of thinking it is the height of lunacy to post messages on Usenet where they are seen by millions of people in thousands of newsgroups and then (apparently) *not* expect others to pay any attention to what you have written. All that is happening here is that a systematic compilation is being made of the things people talk about. If you don't like it, then don't post. I've even had people write me to complain about the index of authors and subjects for this Digest which I have compiled over the past several years. They think it is just terrible that anyone who wishes to do so can get a list of everything they have written here. Let's face it, the real culprit here is the computer, isn't it? If it were not for computer record keeping, a lot of records theoretically available for inspection would be as a practical matter nearly impossible to obtain or review due to the sheer size of the listings. You who argue about the invasion of your privacy should remember that the computer is what has made it all possible, so start by unplugging yours. Well not everyone agrees with me. The next message in this issue talks about (who else!) ... Big Brother. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 15:51:19 -0400 From: mkuras@ccs.neu.edu (Michael J Kuras) Subject: Big Brother - He's Everywhere! Organization: College of Computer Science, Northeastern University This is from the 23 Oct 95 {Boston Globe}: DEJANEWS SPARKS PRIVACY CONCERNS DejaNews Partners, an Internet service that catalogues and indexes Usenet messages, is under attack for the service's potential to violate Internet users' privacy. The service makes copies of every Usenet message and indexes them for easy retrieval. For instance, by typing in someone's name, you can track the messages they posted to various newsgroups over a given period of time. Some Internet users resent the "Big Brother" aspects of the service: "No one ever mentioned to me that it was possible to take a different program and run a search on what you've written," says one. "When you post to Usenet, it automatically gets propagated to tens of thousands of computers," replies DejaNews's president. "So anybody who posted something to Usenet, and then later on has any kind of privacy concerns about it must have seriously misunderstood what they were doing." DejaNews can be reached at < http://dejanews.com/ >. This service is supported by corporate sponsers who get a 6"x1" ad at the top of each page. (I just turn off 'Auto Load Graphcs' and I hardly notice the intrusion.) I tried it out by performing a search of messages I posted in the last month. Each reference to the msg's I posted is hot-linked so I can point-and-click to instantly view the text. It's both interesting and admittedly a little disconcerting. On the other hand, doing a keyword search on 'Slaton' shows what kind of bandwidth this, uh, gentleman is generating. ----------------------------------------- michael j kuras www.ccs.neu.edu/~mkuras mkuras@ccs.neu.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm glad to have a service like DejaNews available. It is an extremely valuable reference tool on an increasing cluttered and noisy net. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 10:17:50 -0600 From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Chicago Ameritech Cellular PINs Required? I received a puzzling piece of mail from Ameritech recently which seemed to imply (it was _very_ carefully worded) that I needed to call them and set up a PIN for my cellphone service as part of their Ongoing Battle Against Telecommunications Fraud. It did not actually say that this was mandatory, nor did it say that it was purely optional, only that I should be calling such-and-such a number and setting it up. An enclosed glossy brochure covered the usual questions and answers, which I won't rehash here; we all know the issues and the details. Basically, I don't want the PIN. I make only light use of my two cellular phones anyway, and don't want to mess around with manually entering the PIN for each call, especially while driving. I do not frequent busy areas where someone would be trolling for numbers. I have not called the PIN service number yet; I tend to think I'll get more knowledgeable advice here. Does anyone else have more insight on what Ameritech is planning to do with this in the Chicago area? Andrew C. Green (312) 266-4431 Adobe Systems, Inc. (formerly Frame Technology) Advanced Product Services 441 W. Huron Internet: acg@frame.com Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: emedia@netcom.com (Ken McCarthy) Subject: Telecom History Web Site Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 03:38:04 GMT History buffs: The Net is 150+ years old. Check out http://www.e-media.com/telecom for a web version of George Oslin's "The Story of Telecommunications" which tracks the history of electronic communications from 1844 (when it all began with the telegraph) through to today. If you like it, pass it on. Thanks, Ken McCarthy E-Media and telecom history buff [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And thank you for reminding us that the net did not start with AOL's decision to let their subscribers use it, nor for that matter even with the early days of Usenet in the late 1970's. Some think it is a relatively new phenomenon. Not really it isn't ... just the tools we use on it are new. PAT] ------------------------------ From: q11478@email.mot.com (Andy Cobham) Subject: Telephone Key-Pad Standards Organization: Motorola GRO-A/P Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 03:00:41 GMT I am in the process of researching standards and/or regulations regarding telephone (conventional telephone and/or cellular phones, -- both analog and the new GSM digital) keypad layouts. I have been advised that the ITU recently issued a recommendations (ITU-T Recomm- endation E.161) which outlines the criteria behind a new "Standard Keypad Layout". I have not been able to put my hands on a copy of this new "Recommendation". Can anyone help me out with a copy via my EMail address if possible I would be most grateful. EMail address is: Q11478@EMail.MOT.COM ------------------------------ From: albre011@maroon.tc.umn.edu (Bruce Albrecht) Subject: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager Date: 31 Oct 1995 22:08:09 -0600 I am looking for Unix sources to send messages to an alphanumeric pager. I've been told that there was one posted a while back, perhaps to alt.sources. Does anyone know a location for this, or an approximate posting date? For that matter, are the ixo files in the telecom-archives/technical directory adequate for writing one from scratch? ------------------------------ From: Antnio Sousa Subject: GH337 and Mobile "Modem" Date: 30 Oct 1995 17:48:21 GMT Organization: telepac Hi, I've recently seen a post referring that the DC12 "modem" that fits with Ericsson's GH337 only works at 2400? Can anybody confirm or not? Thanks in advance, Antonio Sousa ------------------------------ From: jkovaly@mindspring.com (James Kovaly) Subject: BONeS vs. CACI Network Modeling Question Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 15:33:40 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc. I am currently evaluating two network modeling tools, the BoNES product from Systems&Networks and the Comnet III product from CACI. Has anyone had any experience with either or both of these products that they would like to share? Thanks, jkovaly@mindspring.com James Kovaly Network Design Engineer Bellsouth Cellular ------------------------------ From: imirman@optoelectronics.ultranet.com (Ilya Mirman) Subject: Physical Layer Testing For Fiber Optic Transmitters and Receivers Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 14:15:30 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. I am curious: when do people stop testing the physical layer or fiber optic transmitters and receivers? Obvously, the individual components get tested during their manufacture (spectral characteristics, pulse performance ("EYE"), Error Rate performance, etc. Presumably, they are also tested once integrated into the system manufacturers' boards. But, at some point (deployment, maintenance, etc.) people no longer look at the eye diagrams or spectral characteristics -- instead, they look for "higher layer" issues, such as sending packets, system jitter, etc. My question: when, exactly, does the "physical layer" testing stop, and higher level testing begin? Thanks! (feel free to e-mail me...) ------------------------------ From: jaap.droogers@solair1.inter.nl.net (jaap droogers) Subject: GPT and Ringmaster Organization: NLnet Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 10:03:11 GMT We are using an GPT iSDX large PBX. For costs registration we use the Ringmaster program. The problem is that every day we have one or two calls with no costs although the calls took more than three minutes. Has anyone a solution for us? Thanks, Jaap Droogers Leeuwenhorst Congres Centrum Langelaan 3 2211 XT NOORDWIJKERHOUT The Netherlands ------------------------------ Subject: Another UK Number Change Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 10:37:55 GMT From: Clive D.W. Feather The UK National Code Change, completed this April, was supposed to solve our numbering problems for the forseeable future. Well, many of us foresaw that other places were still running out of numbers. Oftel announced recently that Reading numbers are about to change again. 0734 XXXXXX became 01734 XXXXXX, and will now become 0118 9XX XXXX. Parallel running will start in April 1996, with the final changeover in January 1998. According to posters in uk.telecom, there already exist 01734 90XXXX and 01734 04XXXX numbers. No-one is sure how these will interact during parallel running. Clive D.W. Feather | Work: clive@demon.net | Gateway House Senior Manager | Home: clive@stdc.demon.co.uk | 322 Regents Park Road Demon Internet Ltd. | Tel: +44 181 371 1000 | Finchley | Fax: +44 181 371 1281 | London N3 2QQ ------------------------------ From: JeanBernard_Condat@eMail.FranceNet.fr (JeanBernard Condat) Reply-To: JeanBernard_Condat@eMail.FranceNet.fr Subject: Head of French Hacker Group Was a Secret Service Agent Date: 31 Oct 1995 18:38:42 GMT Organization: FranceNet Bonjour, In the October 12th issue of {Intelligence Newsletter}, I note the following text that the editor accept to put at the end of this email. Don't hesitate to send me all your comments related at this fact ... Regards, Jean-Bernard Condat 47 rue des Rosiers, 93400 Saint-Ouen, France Phone: +33 141238807, portable phone: +33 07238628 JeanBernard_Condat@eMail.FranceNet.FR ============================================= A Computer Spy Unmasked For years Jean-Bernard Condat has undoubtedly been France's best-known computer hacker. Appearing on television talk shows, launching provocative operations and attending computer seminars, he founded the Chaos Computer Club France (CCCF) in 1989 as France's answer to the renowned Chaos Computer Club in Germany. French journalist Jean Guisnel revealed this week in a book entitled Guerres dans le Cyberespace, Internet et les Services Secrets (Cyberspace War, Internet and Secret Services) published by the Editions La Decouverte (ISBN 2-7071-2502-4) that Condat has been controlled from the outset by the Direction de la Surveillance du Territoire. A student in Lyons where he followed music and information technology courses, Condat was taken in hand by the local branch of the DST in 1983 after committing some "minor misdemeanor." The DST organized his participation in hacker meetings abroad. Guisnel said that from 1989 onwards "Jean-Luc Delacour, Condat's handler at the DST, decided that his proteg‚ was ready for bigger and better things." He asked Condat to start up CCCF, then worked to promote his public image in order that the largest number of hackers would gravitate towards him. The DST printed hundreds of T-shirts and thousands of post cards for him. When Thomson and Pechiney found that hackers were trying to break into their systems Condat enabled the French counter-espionage service to trace the intruders. When he was taking part in a television program in 1991 in which he was to demonstrate how to hack into a system his handler dictated what he should say in his earphones. Questioned by Intelligence Newsletter, Condat admitted he had worked for the DST over a 52 month period and written up 1,032 reports during that time. He claims, however, that he broke with the DST in 1991 and that he intends to shortly publish an account of what he calls his "turpitude." Whether true or not, Condat worked for several years for the SVP company before leaving it a few months ago to take over a key function: he is now system operator for the France forum on Compuserve. Guisnel cites any number of cases of how "Internet is controlled to the bone" by such measures as turning around hackers, systematically bugging computer networks and manipulating newsgroups. "If no serious company should confide its correspondence to the network and if no government should use it to transmit sensitive information the reason is that the NSA is watching and that all the network's communications physically travel through the U.S., and very probably through computer filters at its installations at Fort Meade, Maryland," Guisnel said. He said the conclusion was that advanced encryption programs like PGP needed to be used if one wants to communicate in a secure manner on the Internet. Citing the debate raging in the U.S. over computer security which has made little impact in Europe, Guisnel called on France to authorize the use of encryption by everyone and criticized the country's reactionary policy in that score. He said the attitude, while defensive in nature, was all the harder to understand because its first consequence was to increase the vulnerability of French companies, to the benefit of NSA. Copyright 1995 Indigo Publications. All rights reserved. This news report may not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of Indigo Publications. For more information and sample issues, please mail to indigo1@dialup.francenet.fr. ------------------------------ From: pboric@ctc-mundo.net (Patricio Boric) Subject: ETSI Standards Needed Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 13:43:06 GMT Organization: CTC Mundo I need to get several standards from ETSI, specially those related with EURO ISDN If somebody knows where I can get them, please let me know. ------------------------------ From: davidn@ziprobes.com (David Nyarko) Subject: Specs for HM9102A Telephone IC Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 15:08:23 GMT Organization: Z.I.Probes. Inc, Edmonton, Alberta Hi, Could I have specs and equivalents for the HM9102A IC. It is in a tone/pulse telephone with redial. Who manufactures this chip? The marking 8918CZ is also found on the chip. It might be a date code. My email address is: davidn@ziprobes.com My fax no. is 403-463-1567 ------------------------------ From: gideony@eskimo.com (Gideon Yuval) Subject: Towing Pirates Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 00:12:31 GMT The AAA's newsletter for Washington state warbs about "towing pirates", who interecept cellular calls to the AAA, tow the car, and then start playing games. And I thought cellular snooping was go-to-jail stuff ... ------------------------------ From: joemortz@rain.org (Joe Mortz) Subject: Cable Services Renewal Help Needed Date: 31 Oct 1995 07:03:38 GMT Organization: RAIN Public Access Internet (805) 967-RAIN Looking for Cable TV franchise renewal information for small group of concerned "consumers" ... referrals, suggestions will be appreciated. Joe Mortz (805-564 0824) ------------------------------ From: Lisa R. Owen Subject: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Date: 01 Nov 1995 04:40:27 GMT Organization: Hilco Technologies, Inc. Hi, I'd like to know how to have more than one cellular phone on the same phone line. As far as I know, this is legal under FCC guidelines (I want to make sure of this, though), but the primary service provider (Southwestern Bell, for example) can't provide that reprogramming service for you. I don't know of any companies in the St. Louis area that provide this service, or exactly how they would be classified (a friend of mine just had this done in Atlanta). Thanks for your assistance! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Everything I have heard about this and all the discussions we have had about it here in the past would seem to indicate you are *wrong*. More than one phone per number is a definite no-no where cellular companies are concerned. Perhaps readers with more specifics on this will write you direct and explain it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David A. Cantor Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 17:10:36 EST Subject: New Area Code Shows Up On Caller-ID The new area code 860 showed up today, 10/31, for the first time on my caller ID unit on a local call. The last local call I received with the old area code 203 was on 10/29. David A. Cantor +1 860.444.7268 (444-RANT) 453 Bayonet St., #16 Connecticut has a new area code. New London, CT 06320 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #458 ****************************** From ptownson Wed Nov 1 03:05:37 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA11554; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 02:56:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 02:56:03 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511010756.CAA11554@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #459 Status: R TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Nov 95 02:56:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 459 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Music-While-on-Hold (Arsen Darakdjian) WA State Order on Local Interconnection (Glenn Blackmon) Re: Telecom in China (John W. Pan) Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? (John McGing) Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? (Stan Schwartz) Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? (Stephen Knight) Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? (A. Hawthorn) Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice? (Steve Cogorno) Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice? (bgriffis@capital) Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? (Malcolm Osborne) Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone (Tim Shoppa) Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone (Michael J Kuras) Re: Area Code Authoritative List (Stuart Zimmerman) Re: Area Code Authoritative List (Linc Madison) Re: Alpha Paging From DTMF Phone (Barry Margolius) Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service (Martin McCormick) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: adarak@deltanet.com (Arsen Darakdjian) Subject: Music-While-on-Hold Date: 1 Nov 1995 00:19:49 GMT Organization: Unique Computer Systems This >should< be a fun project for those telephone guru's: I was wondering if anyone can help me build a device that will allow me to put music while the phone line is on hold. I don't know the specifics or the changes in the phone line when someone is put on hold, but there must be some change because the phone recognizes that the line is on hold by blinking. I am able to get the music onto the line by putting both wires from the microphone jack off the radio ON TO the ground/tip wires of the phone. Now, that works, but all the time! That is the reason for the device ... it will know when the line is on HOLD status and allow the music to play until the hold is off. I obviously intend to keep the radio on all the time with the micro- phone jack cable plugged in, but need this device to notice the change in the line and allow the current to go through when put on hold, and stop the current (from the microphone jack) when the handset is picked up (or line is put off-hold). Any suggestions? adarak@deltanet.com ------------------------------ From: Glenn Blackmon Subject: WA State Order on Local Interconnection Date: 1 Nov 1995 00:56:52 GMT Organization: Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission The Washington Utilities and Transportation on Oct. 31 issued an order setting the terms and conditions for interconnection of new local exchange companies with the existing networks. The commission ordered the incumbents, US West and GTE, to interconnect with competitors at mutually agreed-upon meet points and to use "bill and keep" or mutual traffic exchange as an interim compensation mechanism. The commission accepted US West's offer to file a tariff unbundling the local loop and directed the company to do so within 30 days. A news release and the order may be found at: http://www.wln.com/~wutc3/iconnect.html Glenn Blackmon glenn@wutc.wa.gov Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission ------------------------------ From: JohnWPan@aol.com Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 15:27:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Telecom in China ADECKER@bear.com (Andrew Decker) wrote: > While the details vary depending upon the sector (and to some extent > the report), in general, the Government is attempting to increase the > aggregate number of access lines by 10+ million per year (essentially > building an RBOC every year!). Depending on who you talk to, the telephone penetration in China is one to five percent, with big cities like Beijing and Shanghai reaching as high as 30%. Now if the government wants to increase penetration by one percent per year for the next ten years. That's one RBOC per year. It is not going to happen. An excellent piece on telephones in China is a folksy {New York Times Magazine} article by Nancy Berliner, September 5, 1993. While two years old, things have not changed that much. Some are willing to pay US $5000 (several years average annual salary) to get connected, which exceeds the per line capital cost. What percentage of the total population are so wealthy or so willing? A call from Shanghai to New York costs US$6.00 per minute, ten times the cost from New York to Shanghai. Needless to say, China outlawed callback companies. Because it is such a lucrative business, the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications (MPT), while wanting to increase revenues, does not want anyone else dipping into their turf. However, the Ministry of Power, Electronics, and Rail (MPER), using right-of-way it owns as leverage, won an inter-ministerial fight to gain the right to enter the telephone business as well. Not mentioned by Andrew Decker is the fact that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has its own telephone system and owns ALL the radio frequency spectrum. It too is vying to enter the telephone business, using spectrum as leverage. Clandestine telephone systems are popping up all over, usually with the blessing (bribe) of the local mayor or governor. That's the "incredible pace" PAT mentioned. Most popular are turnkey wireless systems packaged in several suitcases. However, when MPT in Beijing finds out, it dispatches the army to dismantle and confiscate the equipment, provided of course that the army is not part of the scheme. By that time, the entrepreneurs have already recouped their investment, packed up and started business elsewhere. Who are these telephone guerrillas? They are usually overseas Chinese who maintained relations with the mayors of their old home town. Profits are converted on the black market and smuggled out. For major companies investing in telecommunications in China, the big issue is repatriation of profits, which is prohibited. What AT&T does is to open a factory. The profits from operations are used to pay wages in the telephone factory. The telephones are then shipped out. Boeing, in like manner, ships out airplane tails as payment for airliners it sells to China. No money comes out. Old Shanghai is different. Prior to 1949, ITT owned, and covered the city with telephones. After that, the People's Republic confiscated the phone system and disconnected all private telephones. Thus with excess capacity, reconnecting today is easy, provided the district manager, the number assignment clerk, the mainframe operator, the lineman, the installer, and the billing clerk all have received proper "gifts" which are recurring, else the phone will cease to work. For the newer parts of Shanghai, however, there is simply no telephones at all. The information presented here comes from newspaper articles, personal visits, and recent reports from visitors from China. Disputes welcome. ------------------------------ From: jmcging@access.digex.net (John McGing) Subject: Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? Date: 31 Oct 1995 21:05:21 -0500 Organization: Digital Express, Maryland Reply-To: jmcging@access.digex.net I use Allnet for my Cellphone (they cut a deal with our employee association and Bell Atlantic) and they get the LD traffic. And I got a bill a week ago from Frontier telling me that Allnet and Frontier have merged and now to write the check out to Frontier. Service seems good, people seem profesional; and I had no problems with the Allnet people either. Of course, my first bill was for $.07. Good price for a LD call from the cellphone to Des Plaines, IL from Baltimore but I did feel foolish writing the check. jmcging@access.digex.net JOHN.PF on GEnie Team OS/2 http://www.access.digex.net/~jmcging [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T has a policy on their cellular billing for long distance calls which says if your bill is less than five dollars, you may put off paying it for three months, or until it goes over that amount, whichever comes first. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Re: Frontier Telecom Experiences? Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 22:04:34 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V15 #454, Robert Levandowski wrote: > You should be able to force calls through Frontier with the 10xxx code: > 10211. Going back to when I had an account with Frontier when they were called RCI, in areas where Frontier isn't the LEC, you have to have an account with them before they will allow a call over 10211. They also didn't bill through my LEC (NYNEX, at the time). They used to have great rates for intra-state, inter-LATA New York State calls, as well as six-second billing. I dropped them after they discontinued their 950 service. They grandfathered those of us who had it, but they raised the rates so high it didn't make sense to use them. Stan ------------------------------ From: sdk@cci.com (Stephen Knight) Subject: Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? Organization: Northern Telecom Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 22:21:08 GMT In article , scotta@primenet.com (Scott Atwood) wrote: > US West in the Phoenix (AZ) area is suppose to have Call > Waiting-Caller ID sometime before the end of the year ... (yeah right). > I have read a few threads regarding the spec's, but all refer to the > BellCore TR-NWT-000030 document. Is this spec available on the net, > or libraries or does one have to shell out the $$ to receive it? > I've tried to contact the local telco reps and they are of NO help. > They went on to say that even they don't have a CW-Caller ID unit > available for us to buy (recommended trying Radio Shack :-) ). Northern's PowerTouch 350 (aka Vista 350) can do CallerID w/ Call Waiting. > So far I have gathered that after the CW signal is sent the caller-Id > unit must [mute the handset] , send one of the [A,B,C or D] Touch > Tones at which time the CO will send the Caller_ID burst. From TR-NWT-000030: "For data transmission, however, a CPE alerting signal (CAS), consisting of a pair of frequencies will be used. When the CPE receives this signal correctly, it will reply with an ACK to the SPCS indicating readiness to receive information (see SR-TSV-002476). The SPCS will then send the relevant data to the CPE". > Am I even close to what is necessary? Yep. Altho, it should be pointed out that it's not limited to just the CO sending the information (which could make for some confusion). steve knight nortel ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 23:39:00 -0500 From: ahawtho@emory.edu (Andrew B. Hawthorn) Subject: Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? In the Atlanta area BellSouth is offering two new services -- Call Waiting Deluxe and Call Director. Call Waiting Deluxe delivers the Caller ID information for Call Waiting calls. It currently sells for around $6/mo. Call Director is an integrated service of Caller ID Name and Number Delivery with Anonymous Call Rejection, Call Waiting Deluxe, MemoryCall Voice Mail Service, and Three-Way Calling. Call Director gives you the same features as conventional Caller ID and Call Waiting Deluxe, but also allows you to direct the second incoming call. As I understand it, when a Call Waiting call is received, the name and number are displayed on the screen of the phone and the phone user can select an option from a menu. The menu allows the phone user to switch between calls, send the second caller directly to their voice mail, or send a message to the second caller asking them to hold while the phone user completes their call and answers the incoming call. It currently sells for around $16/mo. As I understand it, both services require the Nortel Powertouch series of telephones (http://www.nortel.com/english/phones/power225.html). BellSouth is selling these phones when the service is ordered. I would love either of these two services, but I don't want to part with my Nortel M9417 two line Caller ID phone. If there are any Nortel people out there who know if a Powertouch with two line capabilities and the ability to handle the Call Waiting Deluxe is in the works, please let me know! Andrew Hawthorn ahawtho@emory.edu ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice Systems? Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 13:31:36 PST Steve Samler said: > as the delimiter between the story numbers. We are getting reports > from some users that the system does not recognize the pound key. I > know that the other keys work because they are required to enter a > user id and a password to enter the system. I'm almost positive I know what it is: PBX equipment. Doctors offices often have Merlin systems (don't know why, but every doctor I've been to has had some type of Merlin). Anyway, many PBX systems use the # key for features. If you dial # instead of it sending the actual DTMF, it waits for a code and then processes that feature. On a Merlin you can avoid this by typing ## each time you want to send a #. Toshiba phone systems have a similar "feature." TO deactivate, use **##. See the user's manual from the PBX for more info. Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: cccef.bgriffis@capital.ge.com Subject: Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice Systems? Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 17:14:10 PDT Organization: GE Capital News Server You may want to find out what type of phone system callers with problems are using. I was in an offfice with an older Toshiba Strata and it did not emit a pound (I couldn't get into my voice mai!) There was a workaround -- I contacted a rep. from Toshiba. I don't remember the sequence now as we swapped the system out. ------------------------------ From: Malcolm Osborne Subject: Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? Date: 31 Oct 1995 17:01:43 GMT Organization: Telkom S.A. Ltd ezx@ix.netcom.com (Ed Marion) wrote: > Does anyone know why Countries like Canada, Bermuda > the British Virgin Islands, and the Carribean in general are > all accessible from within the USA with a 1 + Area Code + number? > The rates to these countries can be onerous. About $1 min to > the Cayman Islands, for instance. So, dialing 1-809 + Cayman > Islands seven digit phone number) can rack up some serious charges. > A small business or individual that does not have a programmable PBX > really has no control, other that blocking all 1+ calls and strict > employee training. Recently, a new employee racked up about $120 in > LD to Canada (AC 905) because she thought it was in the USA. The same > LD time to a USA number would have cost only about $60. > For that matter, with NAFTA and all that, why does it cost about 25 > cents per minute to call suburban Toronto from Houston during business > hours, when it only costs 12 cents per minute to call Seattle which is > 500 miles more distant? On 800 inbound, it is even worse ... 56 cents > vs 16 cents. Isn't the reason for higher charges for crossing international borders due the continued use of the Inter-Administration Accounting system, whereby each country has to pay a share of the traffic between themselves? I have seen it mooted that telcos should change to a `sender keeps all' policy. Perhaps then there could be parity in tariffs, irrespective of destination. Malcolm Osborne Pretoria South Africa EMail: osbornmc@telkom03.telkom.co.za ------------------------------ From: shoppa@altair.krl.caltech.edu (Tim Shoppa) Subject: Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone Date: 31 Oct 1995 19:29:33 GMT Organization: Kellogg Radiation Lab, Caltech In article , Henry Baker wrote: > On a recent trip to Europe, a number of my associates were furious that > most of the public telephones don't have '*' and '#' touch tone keys that > work, and hence they couldn't access their voice mail!! > Perhaps the first order of business for some of these services is to offer > an alternative keying that doesn't require '*' and '#'. Voice recognition > to bypass these payphone bandits would also appear to be an important > requirement. A more direct solution would be to go to the local Radio Shack and get one of those pocket autodialers which generate touch-tone phones and send them out of a small speaker that you hold up to the phone's mouthpiece. I've used these with good success from payphones and hotel phones in Europe. (As a matter of fact, I didn't see a single touch-tone phone in the part of central Italy I was in last summer!) > I also understand that other pay phones don't allow touch tones at all, > once the call is made, so that revenues from the pay phone are 'enhanced'. Watch out with these US payphones, though. I swear that some of these have *disconnected* me when I've tried to use a pocket autodialer after the touch-tone pad was disabled. Tim shoppa@altair.krl.caltech.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 15:32:45 -0400 From: mkuras@ccs.neu.edu (Michael J Kuras) Subject: Re: E-Mail Over the Telephone Organization: College of Computer Science, Northeastern University Recently, PDIXON.US.ORACLE.COM wrote: > Does anyone know of a service that will read email messages over the > telephone? I read this off of Edupage this week ... COMPUSERVE BY PHONE CompuServe will offer a new feature that allows subscribers to access the system using just a telephone. Code-named CallingAll Card, the service will allow a user to call an 800 number and check stock quotes, flight information and handle e-mail and faxes. Eventually users will be able to have their e-mail read to them via text-to-voice software. "We're opening up CompuServe to millions and millions of people that don't own computers as well as CompuServe users on the run," says the company's strategy manager. (Wall Street Journal 26 Oct 95 B3) michael j kuras www.ccs.neu.edu/~mkuras mkuras@ccs.neu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 11:28 EST From: Stuart Zimmerman <0007382020@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Area Code Authoritative List The list sent in by bkron@netcom.com (BUBEYE!) was well done but slightly incomplete. Area code 441 is is not the Caribbean and Puerto Rico. It is actually Bermuda (which is not part of the Caribbean). Area code 860 for Connecticut was missing. Stuart Zimmerman Fone Saver, LLC 007382020@mcimail.com 1 (800) 313-6631 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That lack of 860 might have been my fault in the editing process. I had a terrible time getting that message edited. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Area Code Authoritative List Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 16:38:19 GMT BUBEYE! (bkron@netcom.com) wrote: >> I've searched the archives and I've searched at Bellcore. Is there >> any authoritative, up to date list of all the North American area codes? > Sure thing. Here's one that's up to date as of today, 10/27/95. Well, actually, there are two corrections. > 441 PUERTO RICO & CARIBBEAN Area Code 441 is specifically Bermuda, which actually isn't in the Caribbean, it's in the Atlantic. It does not cover any area outside Bermuda. The rest of Area Code 809 (Puerto Rico, Caribbean, Bahamas) is not affected by this change. > 562 CALIFORNIA This area code is not yet in service, pending revision by the CPUC. (The test numbers may work, but there are no "real" numbers yet.) Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And yet Linc, even with your eagle eyes for accuracy, you apparently overlooked 860 which got left out somehow. I'll tell you, these new area codes are a real pain to try and keep up with aren't they. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bfm@pobox.com (Barry Margolius, NYC) Subject: Re: Alpha Paging From DTMF Phone Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 18:39:01 GMT I have come across two methods of "touch-toning" alpha messages that I like better than the one you describe. I've not seen either of them used in paging, but here they are: 1. Press the letter key once for the first letter, twice for the second letter, thrice (I love that word) for the third letter. Your "call home" example would be: 222 2 555 555 * 44 666 6 33. This system is, to me, the easiest to use, but is subject to error as the user must pause between each letter of the alphabet, e.g. to differentiate AA from B. 2. Your first keypress indicates which set of three letters, the second keypress is 1,2, or 3 to indicate which letter. So "call home" becomes 23 21 53 53 * 42 63 61 32. This is a bit tougher for the human, but safer since all letters parse as two digit combinations. Barry F Margolius, New York City bfm@pobox.com For PGP Key, finger bfm@panix.com ------------------------------ From: Martin McCormick Subject: Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service Date: 31 Oct 1995 17:30:13 GMT Organization: Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK I was tuning my HF receiver around 26.0 megahertz one day a few years back when the sunspot cycle was much higher and heard what sounded like a wireless telephone of some kind. The voices had a Canadian accent and I seem to recall hearing the name of a town or some other reference that let me know that the signal originated from Canada. I remember hearing dial-tone and pulse-dialing sounds with the dial-tone being the modern duel-frequency style. From what little I heard, it sounded like it might have been one of these radio telephone systems for isolated areas. It appeared to be working quite well at the time. I have also heard similar type transmissions on roughly the same frequencies which appeared to come from somewhere in Latin America. Conversations were in Spanish and the dial-tone and other sounds lead me to believe that the phone system that the radio telephone was connected to was a rotary stepping system with lots of clicks and curchunks. If the link from the outlying telephone to the switch is also somewhere in the 26 megahertz range, then those poor souls must have to contend with all the illegal CB-type activity between about 25.5 and 26.965 megahertz. Since the radio telephone uses full-duplex operation, any carriers or other interference on either of the two frequencies will really bother somebody. Much of the pirate radio traffic in the 26 megahertz range is a mixture of single sideband, AM, and occasional FM, but it doesn't really matter since any kind of strong signal would pretty well trash the system. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK 36.7N97.4W OSU Center for Computing and Information Services Data Communications Group ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #459 ****************************** From ptownson Wed Nov 1 19:28:39 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id TAA02352; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:21:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 19:21:26 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511020021.TAA02352@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #460 Status: R TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Nov 95 19:21:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 460 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telephone Key-Pad Standards (Judith Oppenheimer) Appalachian Regional Commission Unveils Telecom Initiative (Nigel Allen) Ameritech Problems (Alex Strasheim) Wanted: Dialogic 21D/41D With Stylus Software and Diagnostics (Les Kula) These Sleezeball Companies Are Killing Me! (Johnny Castaldi) Sharing One Phone Line With Multiple Modems (John S. Hope) Service Centres For GSM Cellular Phones (Giuliano D'Ambrosi) Selective Answering Machine (Theodore Wayne Hong) Re: Audio Signal Directly Into Phone Line (Mike) Re: Audio Signal Directly Into Phone Line? (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (Curtis Wheeler) Re: When was the Coiled Phone Cord Invented? (John Shriver) Re: Old Los Angeles Prefixes (Michael Hollomon, Jr.) Re: Using *69 To Get Caller's ID (Ph0ne Phreak) Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople (Philip Spencer) Re: Last Laugh! Trying to Call the Nowhere Man (Scott Montague) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: producer@pipeline.com (Judith Oppenheimer) Subject: Telephone Key-Pad Standards Date: 1 Nov 1995 17:20:01 -0500 Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM) In comp.dcom.telecom q11478@email.mot.com (Andy Cobham) said: I've got a copy buried somewhere. Email me your fax number, and I'll see if I can dig it up. Essentially, the new worldwide standard mirrors the U.S. keypad, with the addition of Q on the 7 and Z on the 9. After this was adopted, the U.S. modified its standard with these additions so that there is supposed to be one consistent standard. Judith Oppenheimer, President Interactive CallBrand(TM): Strategic Leadership, Competitive Intelligence Producer@pipeline.com. Ph: +1 800 The Expert. Fax: +1 212 684-2714. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 02:34:29 -0500 From: Nigel Allen Subject: Appalachian Regional Commission Unveils Telecom Initiative Organization: Internex Online Here is a press release from the Appalachian Regional Commission. I don't work for the Commission, but I thought people here would find the press release interesting. Appalachia is the area in the U.S. defined by the Appalachian mountains, traditionally synonymous with coal-mining and poverty. The region is more economically diversified and better off today than it once was, but it still suffers from a lot of poverty. Here's the press release: ARC Unveils Telecommunications Initiative Contact: Duane J. DeBruyne of the Appalachian Regional Commission, 202-884-7663, E-mail ARCnews@arc.gov JACKSON, Miss., Oct. 27 -- Jesse L. White Jr., federal co-chairman of the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), today announced that the ARC has adopted as a major policy goal the deployment of "a modern, cutting-edge telecommunications technology infrastructure" throughout the 13-state region to ensure that "the information superhighway not bypass Appalachia as the national highway system did some four decades ago." Speaking before the Mississippi Library Association in Jackson, Miss., White said that carefully planned telecommunications networks, backed with widespread education and training, would "contribute mightily toward removing distance and ruralness as two of the most significant barriers to economic development in Appalachia." "Education, training, planning, coordination, and most importantly, state, regional and federal cooperation must be laid as the foundation stones to the introduction of new technology in Appalachia, regardless of the hardware, software, RAM, bits or bytes," said White. "The Appalachian Regional Commission pledges its best effort to help communities and institutional centers throughout the region gain access to, and participate in, all of the benefits offered by today's worldwide telecommunications revolution." In addition to telecommunications, ARC is also launching major initiatives covering civic leadership development and globalization of the Appalachian economy. The Appalachian Regional Commission was created by Congress to serve as a partner with the 13 governors of Appalachia to improve health, education and economic opportunities throughout the region. Press release forwarded to the TELECOM Digest by Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen ------------------------------ From: alex@proust.suba.com (Alex Strasheim) Subject: Ameritech Problems Date: 1 Nov 1995 19:23:25 GMT Organization: Suba Communications We run a small ISP in Chicago, and we can't get Ameritech to set up our hunt groups properly. Some lines don't get hit by incoming calls at all, and other lines drop in and out periodically -- the behavior of the hunt groups actually changes every five or ten minutes. Sometimes a group will ring through (ie., no modem answers), even though we can check each line individually and they'll all answer. Then it will work again ten minutes later. We've tried all sorts of things -- calling Ameritech every day, calling the office of the President (which gets their attention, but doesn't get the problem fixed), etc. My question here is pretty general: how do people go about getting these types of problems fixed? What do you do when the telco denies that there's a problem? Are there consultants who can get things fixed up for us, people who understand how the phone system is wired together? Thanks. ------------------------------ From: lkula@eng.sun.com (Les Kula) Subject: Wanted: Dialogic 21D/41D With Stylus Software and Diagnostics Date: 1 Nov 1995 21:17:23 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc. Reply-To: lkula@eng.sun.com WTB: Dialogic 21D (two-line) or 41D (four-line) voice board for PC with Stylus Innovations Visual Voice Pro applications software for Windows 3.X. I also need the diagnostics program that comes on a floppy with Dialogic 41D four-port card. I'm buying used 41D and the seller does not have the floppy any more. Respond by email please. Thanks, Les ------------------------------ From: CASTALDI@flash.rowan.edu (Johnny Castaldi) Subject: These Sleezeball Companies Are Killing Me! Date: 1 Nov 1995 18:05:58 GMT Organization: Rowan College of NJ I am the telephone administrator for a large college in New Jersey. Every month on my Bell Atlantic phone bill there are several extra charges for companies like Telesphere, Integretel, Discount calling card, Joe Schmoe telephone company and the like. I added toll billing exception to my account, but low and behold, they keep coming. I called my account team to complain, and they tell me that I can't do anything about it because they simply bill for these companies. I can't even refuse to pay these because they just go past due on my Bell bill. After months and months, Bell forgets that they were other company charges and want to come after me for these charges. Has anyone come up with a way to stop this from happening? Ever try to call Integretel (1-800-736-7500)? They tell you to call back at midnight! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By toll billing exception, I think you actually mean Billed Number Screening. You might try asking for it that way just be certain you and Bell Atlantic are speaking the same language. Each of those companies billing you is supposed to have a phone number listed on their billing page where you can call them. A lot of those may actually wind up going back to Integratel, and yes, Integratel makes it quite difficult to reach them at any normal hour of the day. As they say, call them at midnight. You need to get on as many screening databases as possible. Bell Atlantic uses the one all the 'traditional' telcos use, including AT&T as well as MCI and Sprint which have pretty much gained acceptance as 'traditional' telecom companies. Integratel does their own thing as we know, and even then with 'Bell' and 'Integratel' notified, you'll only be covering about 95 percent of the possibilities. What you really need to do is vigorously contact all the sleazeball companies at the phone numbers listed on each page of your phone bill. You'll need to do it and follow up for a couple months with each of them. Before you call *any* of them, have a list of every single number on your phone system. You'll want each and every one of them listed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jhope@sam.neosoft.com (John S. Hope) Subject: Sharing One Phone Line With Multiple Modems Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 07:24:31 GMT Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services +1 713 968 5800 Does anyone know of a company that makes a modem multiplexor. That is, I need a box that will accept one phone line and be able to switch between async posts depending on what command strings I issue. I will be using one phone line to dial into the management functions of several systems. Please provide any information you have including product name, model, company contact, and any experience with the product. Thanks a million, John Hope ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 17:49:22 +0100 From: giuliano.dambrosi@sintesi.inet.it (Giuliano D'Ambrosi) Subject: Service Centres For GSM Cellular Phones I live in Italy and notice the quick increase of cellular GSM mobile phones. Now, many companies sell phones but, if one of these sets does not work, it has to be sent to manufacturer to be repaired. There is no Service Centre who has schemes and spare parts for GSM mobiles. This sems to me a "non sense" on account of times and costs this disorganization requires. As in Germany and UK, to remain in Europe, like in US, I think, these mobile phones have a large circulation, I think manufacturers will use the same methods to organize service here in Italy; so, does anyone know if Service Centres exhist in those countries and are they able to repair phones or only replace them with others? Is it possible to buy spare parts, like any other technical equipment? Regards, Giuliano D'Ambrosi Email: giuliano.dambrosi@sintesi.inet.it Sintesi Srl Phone: 0481-43045 via G. Galilei 7 - Monfalcone (GO) Fax : 0481-411963 ------------------------------ From: uceetwh@ucl.ac.uk (Theodore Wayne Hong) Subject: Selective Answering Machine? Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 20:18:40 GMT Organization: University College London I've recently moved from the US to the UK, and I brought my answering machine with me. It's hooked up to the local switchboard here, and the phone part works fine. I thought the answering machine part did too, until I discovered that it didn't answer outside calls, only internal ones. Now outside calls do have a different ringing pattern (two rings instead of one), but I can't see what would cause the answering machine to ignore calls from outside ...? Theodore Hong t.hong@ucl.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: malong@neocom.ca (Mike) Subject: Re: Audio Signal Directly Into Phone Line Date: 31 Oct 1995 21:14:44 GMT Organization: Neocom Communications In article , dlevasseur@sun1.anza.com says: > In TELECOM Digest #437, ron@tgivan.wimsey.bc.ca wrote: >> How can I play audio directly into the phone line? I'd like to >> connect an RCA-style input to a phone jack so I can play audio >> directly from the stereo/computer output into the phoneline. What >> interfacing electronics is required? > You might try tracking down a "music-oh-hold" device, if such a beast > exists. Please be aware that FCC and Industry Canada rules prohibit > the sale of devices that don't limit the energy sent out over the > telephone line. As such, the line-level audio from your RCA output > can't be legally connected to the phone line without something to > limit its output power. This said, it is certainly possible to > "illegally" connect your RCA jack to a telephone connection. > I believe some of the devices used to *record* telephone conversations > (sold in the "back" sections of many electronics magazines) could be > pressed into service to provide this function. You might consider > using this setup with a telephone having mute capability to prevent > your telephone from adding unwanted signals and distortion to your > RCA-jack audio signal. An isolation transformer capable of carrying > the telephone line's DC current is also recommended. I can provide > information on such transformers if you like. > Coincidentally, I am in the process of helping develop a product that > allows (among other things) the playback of sound card audio out to > the telephone line. This device *has* been approved in accordance > with FCC rules (soon Industry Canada) and we hope to have it available > early in 1996. Send me a private e-mail for more information. Years ago I used to install "WIRED MUSIC" lines for the local phone company in Toronto, basically various ethnic groups wanted to send there own type of music to subscribers all over the city so the owner of "MUSIC COMPANY A" would set up a small studio in his basement and order a music loop from Bell, he would then set up a mickey mouse little amp and cassette player and pump anything he wanted to into the line. The termination suplied by the phone company was just a simple 900 ohm isolation transformer and the audio would go into a bridge in the serving central office and then could be xconnected to virtually anywhere in the world (if ya got the money). The equipment in the CO was made by McCurty and consisted of analog bridges and amps. It was that simple for a fellow to start up his own little "WIRED MUSIC NETWORK". OH YA! the phone company would get reaal mad if the main leg (sender) would crank that little $100 amp to the sky and spill chinese music over everybody's voice lines. Mike ------------------------------ From: sewilco@fieldday.mn.org (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Subject: Re: Audio Signal Directly Into Phone Line? Date: 31 Oct 1995 15:57:56 -0600 Organization: FieldDay In article , TGI wrote: > How can I play audio directly into the phone line? I've seen one inexpensive device in computer stores which looks like it may have a number of uses for comp.dcom.telecom readers. It is called "Voice Mail for the PC" by Reveal. It connects to a phone line, RS-232 serial port, and has two mini stereo phono jacks for a sound card. From the description it seems to be an RS-232 controlled phone circuit which uses a sound card instead of a handset. Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org ------------------------------ From: Curtis Wheeler Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 09:55:48 -0800 Organization: Chevron, La Habra, CA Lisa R. Owen wrote: > I'd like to know how to have more than one cellular phone on the same > phone line. As far as I know, this is legal under FCC guidelines (I > want to make sure of this, though), but the primary service provider > (Southwestern Bell, for example) can't provide that reprogramming > service for you. I don't know of any companies in the St. Louis area > that provide this service, or exactly how they would be classified (a > friend of mine just had this done in Atlanta). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Everything I have heard about this and > all the discussions we have had about it here in the past would seem > to indicate you are *wrong*. More than one phone per number is a > definite no-no where cellular companies are concerned. Perhaps readers > with more specifics on this will write you direct and explain it. PAT] The FCC ammended part 22 late last year and made all cloning, including for your own use, illegal. One ESN, one phone. Many carriers are beginning to offer the service. Here in Northern California you can get it from GTE -- I think they call it "The 1 Plan". You can have your number assigned to a second phone that has it's own ESN. The catch is ... that second phone can't roam. Not all carriers offer the service. If your's doesn't, you're out of luck for now. Curtis Wheeler - Pleasanton, CA ------------------------------ From: John Shriver Subject: Re: When was the Coiled Phone Cord Invented? Date: 1 Nov 1995 18:51:59 GMT Organization: Shiva Corporation There were coiled handset cords in the cloth cord era. I've seen some on old phones for sale. However, I have never seen one in any sort of reasonable condition. They weren't very durable. The rubber ones (on 302 sets), and the later plastic ones on the 500 set, were durable enough to see wide use. I think I haven't seen coiled handset cords on anything older than a 302 set. That would give us a date of the early 1930's, when the 302 came out. I suspect what made the coiled cord practical was the shift from cloth insulation of the individual tinsel conductors to rubber insulation. That had the body to hold the coiling. The overall wrapper remained cotton or rayon. They may have been an extra cost option back in the 1930's and 1940's. Plugs were an extra cost option (presumably per month). Long cords (to the plug) were also an option. When my mother first got a long cord in the 1950's, it was a one-time fee, and you got one long cord forever, even if you moved. Long cords are quite uncommon on old desk phones, from the French (202) phones right up through the pre-modular 500 set. Coiled cloth cords are fairly common on old operator's headsets. I suspect the ones with coiled cords were for supervisors, who were wandering about. Do note that all WECo cords have a date code stamped on one of the metal strain relief. Thus, given a coiled cord, dating it is easy. Cords are usually dated in the IV-36 style, which would be April 1936. I've also seen extensible AECo cloth cords, but they weren't coiled. More of a braid, with one elastic member threaded through. Quite cool. ------------------------------ From: mhollomo@ix.netcom.com (Michael Hollomon, Jr.) Subject: Re: Old Los Angeles Prefixes Date: 1 Nov 1995 04:26:03 GMT Organization: Netcom In article , gershwin@hollywood.cinenet. net says: > Does anyone know of a source of information where one can find the > verbal representations of prefixes in the Metro L.A. area? For > example, in the fifties and early sixties, many Miracle Mile-area > prefixes were designated as WEbster-x-xxxx; many of those "93" > prefixes are still in use today. I would like to know what the verbal > designations of those prefixes were. I know that the Crenshaw district's 29 prefix was called AXminster. That's about all I know. There was also another called RIchmond. But I don't know what part of town that was in. If you find out others, please email me. I'd like to know. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: an197001@anon.penet.fi (Ph0ne Phreak) Subject: Re: Using *69 To Get Caller's ID Date: 01 Nov 1995 19:21:47 GMT Organization: Internet Online Services In article , glnfoote@freenet.columbus. oh.us says: > Can someone explain the exact workings of the Ameritech offering > of "Call Back" as it is used from a single residential line. In my > part of the country, this is the *69 function and calls (dials) the > last person to call you. > According to the friendly people at the business office here> it works totally in the central office with the person who > initiates the call back hearing _nothing_ until the ringing signal is > passed. This eliminates the possibility of capturing the actual > number by recording the tones. This is supposedly mandated > by the Ohio Public Utility Commission at the request of those > businesses (battered women and the like) that need this protection. > Is this right, or did something get left out in the explanation. The way *69 works (correct any errors, please): The exact working in a 1AESS: Associated with every line, there is a call store memory that has in it, among other things, the number of the last person who called it (if known, if not known the number of the incoming TRUNK is put there). Now, when you dial *69, the system just looks at yer call store memory and completes a call between them and you. Nothing special, nothing worth 0.75, and NO extra DTMF tones invloved. bspline ------------------------------ From: spencer@leonardo.net (Philip Spencer) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople Date: 1 Nov 1995 22:29:09 GMT Organization: Zanto Films In article , haverj@huachuca-emh17.army. mil says: > I was just stepping into the shower this morning when my SO handed me > the phone, telling me it was someone from a long distance company. I > was eager to get into the shower; my conversation went like this: > Me: Hello? > Him: Hello, sir. I'm from . How would > you like to save money off your long distance calling? > Me: If I told you that I was very happy with my current carrier, would > that preclude any further conversation? > Him: Actually, no, sir. I have to hear a certain number of "no's" before > I let you go. > Me: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. > Him: Have a nice day, sir. Him: Am I speaking to the man of the house? Me: You're trying to sell me something, aren't you? Him: (Ignoring me) Have you considered a subscription to the Los Angeles Times? Me: Look, give me your home number and I'll call you back and discuss it. Him: This is a business... Me: Yeah, I know but give me your home number. Him: I don't think I can do that... Me: Well then you understand why I don't like being disturbed at home either. Interestingly my wife's number is a sequentially close to mine, we can always tell a machine dialler because it'll hit hers about three to four minutes later. This time the solicitor was a female. She followed her script, I followed mine. She hung up without even discussing why I wanted her home number. ------------------------------ From: 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca (Scott Montague) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Trying to Call the Nowhere Man Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 23:24:47 GMT Reply-To: 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca Hello Pat! I've repeated that mantra you insisted I say 100 times before posting again to the digest, specifically "I will not cause Pat to publish anything incorrect in his digest, I will not cause Pat to publish anything incorrect in his digest, I will not...". Just so you know, you can now call +1-705-234-2222 and get a *LIVE* intercept operator. Hey, didn't I say a few weeks ago you could also call +1-705-864-1160? Well you can, but it seems that the old stepper switch serving that exchange is a little unreliable in forwarding. Oh well. In case you forgot, the people at Bell Canada's Radio Services tell me that some American LD carriers will not allow a voice path to Bell Canada (a highly reputable company) until after supervision. I'd be interested in knowing if you or any of the Digest readers have any trouble communicating with the intecept operator. If things are working OK, after giving the number to the operator they should get a recording saying "At the customer's request, the service at 234-2222 has been temporarily disconnected. The customer can be reached at 864-1710.". In the new fangled automated systems (pretty much everywhere in NA), the ANI of the called number is passed to the intercept generator. The intercept generator then looks at it's tables, and replies with the appropriate intercept. If the called number doesn't have an entry in the computer's tables, the intercept replies that the number is a valid one. This was the problem that Gary Shapiro originally had. Of course, in these old switches in Northern Ontario they have no way of telling what the called number was. So instead you get an operator who types in the number you say you called, and the intercept generator gives you the appropriate message. If you want to hear the weird recording Gary did, give them a working number. Try 864-1710. You'll get the recoding saying "the number you dialed should be in service". And yes, it is sort of weird to hear if you DID dial a working number. Just a little ***CAVEAT***, if you try to call these numbers during the operating season (Late April-Early October) you will get friendly Provincial Park staff. Of course, as this digest is read worldwide, you might be calling at rather unfriendly hours. So please, unless you have a question pertaining to Missinaibi Provincial Park (+1-705-234-2222) or The Shoals Provincial Park (+1-705-864-1160), don't call during the operating season. Hope this makes up for my past mistakes, Scott 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca / Apukwa of 4th \ Scouting: Improving tommorow *Proud to be Canadian* \ Kingston Cubs / through the youth of today. <> ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #460 ****************************** From ptownson Wed Nov 1 22:06:27 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id VAA12896; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 21:56:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 21:56:58 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511020256.VAA12896@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #461 Status: R TELECOM Digest Wed, 1 Nov 95 21:56:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 461 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: FAX Machine as Page Scanner - fax_scan.pcx (0/1) (Doug Krahmer) Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice? (Mark Peacock) Research Sources Wanted on Telecom Companies (Art Durdag) Re: Telco Simulator - Design Challenge? (Ross Oliver) Re: Telco Simulator - Design Challenge? (Roger Snyder) Story From PacBell Very Doubtful (Bren Smith) We Need Telecom Technicans Around the World (jputman@eden.com) When Will They Get Things Together? (Henry Mensch) Re: Need Info on Reducing Power Consumption on Cell Phones (John Dreystadt) Re: 1+ Dialing To Canada and the Caribbean (Ronald D. Havens) Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives (Tony Harminc) Caller ID Specs Needed (Chip Sharp) Re: E-mail Over the Phone (Part 2) (Steve Samler) Re: TCP/IP Specifications (Percy Cave) Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (Jeffrey Rhodes) 900 Mhz Headset Wanted (Ernie Holling) Re: Use Analog Modem on Digital Line (Jack Warner) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jonk@blkbox.com (Doug Krahmer) Subject: Re: FAX Machine as Page Scanner - fax_scan.pcx (0/1) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 03:44:24 GMT Organization: ElectraSoft shensky@umd.umich.edu (Brian C. Shensky) wrote: > I have noticed that connecting the fax machine directly to the > Fax/modem does not supply the line voltage necessary to send the data > over the line. So what does one do? Easy: steal the voltage from > your existing line. > What I do is take a third phone off the hook and wait for it to go > "dead": past the initial dialtone, past the "please hang up" > recording, and finally, past the grinding hang-up-the-goddam-phone > blaze tone. Eventually, the line goes dead, while voltage is still > being passed through the line. Now you can send from the fax to the > PC all on a single line. Make sense? I have a simple diagram of a device to keep the line voltage up. Just decode the .PCX file. Doug Krahmer, ElectraSoft Contact: Internet: jonk@blkbox.com Fidonet: Doug Krahmer on 1:106/10000 FAX: 1-713-499-8423 Voice: 1-713-261-0307 Snail Mail: 3207 Carmel Valley Dr. Missouri City, TX 77459-3068 FaxMail for Windows: WWW: http://www.blkbox.com/~jonk/ FTP: ftp://ftp.blkbox.com/pub/dos/fax_v426.zip BBS: 1-713-499-5939 CIS: GO PCFF, Search FaxMail AOL: GO keyword: Software, Library Search: FaxMail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Because of the size of this file, it has been place directly in the Telecom Archives where it can be located as /technical/fax.machine.page.scanner. Remember, it is a .pcx file and it would be a good idea to set the transfer type to 'I' (binary) when getting it using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 95 13:01:06 CST From: Mark Peacock Subject: Re: Trouble Recognizing the Pound Key With Intervoice? > I've had experience with phone systems that do not send out tones on > the * and # keys ... unless you first press * # consecutively during > your phone call. Then any further uses of these keys, for the rest > of that call, will send out tones. No one seemed to understand why > the phones would be set up this way, but we all needed to learn this > technique so we could page each other. Sorry, I can't remember the > brand name of the phone system, but you might suggest this technique > to your callers. I have run into this with electronic Northern Telecom Meridian sets. You hit the # key to activate out-bound DTMF signalling after dialing. This must be configurable because it doesn't happen on all Meridian sets. Perhaps the switch configuration doesn't have enough DTMF generators. Mark Peacock Deloitte & Touche Consulting Group Detroit, Michigan mpeacock@dttus.com ------------------------------ From: artd@sipemi.com Date: Wed, 01 Nov 95 10:29:30 PST Subject: Research Sources Wanted on Telecom Companies Dear Mr. Townson: I am a research associate at the firm Emerging Markets and Investors Corporation located in Rosslyn, Virginia. I am interested in acquiring information on telecommunication companies around the world. I would like to know if you are aware of any free services that may be available, where I would be able to find research on Telcom companies; not only financial data, but also information such as digitalization%, lines per employee, etc. I would appreciate any consideration that you may give to my question. Sincerely, Art E. Durdag ------------------------------ From: reo@netcom.com (Ross Oliver) Subject: Re: Telco Simulator - Design Challenge? Organization: The Air Affair: http://www.airaffair.com/ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 23:25:52 GMT If you want a pre-packaged solution, a company called Teltone makes a black box that does everything you want, as well as off-hook dialtone, and ring the other device when you dial a series of DTMF digits. It retails for about $300. Teltone also offers a variety of ICs that perform telephone functions, such as ring detection, disconnect detection, etc. If you want a cheap or homebrew solution, there have been two articles this year in either Popular Electronics or Electronics Now on building a simple phone line simulator. Ross Oliver reo@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: rsnyder@panix.com (Roger S.) Subject: Re: Telco Simulator - Design Challenge? Date: 1 Nov 1995 15:16:53 -0500 Organization: The Print Shop Bill Shields (bshields@cts.com) wrote: > I have been asked to look into the feasibility of creating an > interface to a standard telephone (via an RJ-11 jack) which meets the > following requirements: I would think that one of the availble telephone testing/stimulator boxes would do what you are looking for. Radio Shack used to sell one, and I've seen them availble elsewhere. Roger ------------------------------ Date: 1 Nov 1995 16:37:51 -0800 From: Bren Smith Subject: Story From PacBell Very Doubtful I woke up the other day to a dead phone line at home. Hmmm, I'm thinking, did I pay the bill on this? Yeah, I did. So I run to the back alley, and check the line at the demarc with a butt set. Hmmm, still dead. Must be a Pac Bell problem. Using my second line I call PacBell Repair and ask them to test my primary. The rep. says there's no problem and that it must be my wiring. I tell the rep. that I'm at the demarc with all internal wiring removed and that it can't be my wiring (oh, stupid me). She says that they can't be out with a service person until tomorrow. I then ask them if they can remote call forward my dead primary line to my secondary line (remembering what Linc has tried this in the past). They tell me, and this is the real pisser part, that the PUC tariffs prevent them from forwarding my line. When I asked why, the rep. explained that it was to prevent "unfair competition". I'm thinking, "yeah, right who else competes in the local exchange market?" Anyway, to make a short story even longer. The rep. ran another test on my line and it still checked out ok according to them. It turns out that I had a short in my internal wiring, and when I removed it from the demarc it took a few minutes for the CO equipment to detect that the problem was fixed and to restore service. As a side note, when I left for work that morning, I noticed not one, but two Pac Bell repair trucks parked across the street from my house with the repair guys sitting in their truck. So, the question for me still remains. Can PacBell prevent me from Call Forwarding my primary to my secondary because of tariffed restrictions, or were they just snowing me? bren@dantz.com bren@ccnet.com Bren Smith aka NetBoy |510/253-3048 voice Dantz Development |510/253-9099 fax 4 Orinda Way, Bldg C |bren@dantz.com Orinda, CA 94563 |"Practice safe government - use kingdoms" ------------------------------ From: jputman@eden.com Subject: We Need Telecom Technicans Around the World Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 06:33:12 GMT Organization: Adhesive Media, Inc. New World Telecom L.L.C. needs qualified professional telecommunication technicians around the world. Applicants should be able to work in on-premise phone rooms of large businesses. Also should own laptop computer with available communications port and Windows 3.1 or higher, digit-grabber, PhD or similar device to listen to C.O. side of line and detect dialed digits, telephone test set and be PBX (PABX) knowledgeble, able to work closely with NWT on equipment programming and be certified, bonded and insured. Applicants interested should send email to: jputman@eden.com or newworld@eden.com ******and place --technician-- in the subject line.************ Additional information and detailed questionairre's will be sent out upon contact. SPECIFY THE FOLLOWING: --Do you have word 6.0 Yes or No --What is your mail server software name- Eudora or Pegasus, etc. --Can you pkunzip documents Yes or No --Do you prefer BinHex or UUencode Other:_____________ **WE NEED QUALIFIED TELECOMMUNICATION TECHNICIANS IN ALL COUNTRIES OUTSIDE U.S.///this can be a very lucrative offering** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 09:36:04 PST From: henry mensch Subject: When Will They Get Things Together? Can someone tell me where to look for information on when/whether California's PUC will sort out their differences with the local telephone companies (Pac*hell and GTE) with respect to the pro- vision of Caller-ID services? # henry mensch / po box 14592; sf, ca 94114-0592 / # http://www.q.com/henry/ ------------------------------ From: johnd@mail.ic.net (John N. Dreystadt) Subject: Re: Need Information on Reducing Power Consumption on Cell Phones Date: 01 Nov 1995 17:26:06 GMT Organization: ICNET... Your Link To The Internet... +1.313.998.0090 Reply-To: johnd@mail.ic.net In article , lytan@alpha.ntu.ac.sg says: > Does anyone have any ideas on how companies have tried to reduce > power consumption on cellular phones? Many ideas are being tried and used. One of the more interesting is where the cell phone determines how strong the signal getting to the cell tower is and reduces the output wattage if the tower is getting a very strong signal. I know about this because of problems in Mexico City where some locations have very sharp changes in signal strength as you moved. If you had a phone that did not try to lower the signal, you would notice some buzzing. If you had a phone that did lower the signal, disconnects were frequent. John Dreystadt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 21:33:56 -0500 From: RONALD.D.HAVENS@sprint.sprint.com Subject: Re: 1+ Dialing To Canada and The Caribbean Both Canada and the Caribbean are part of the North American Numbering Plan (NANP). Any point that is part of the NANP can be reached by dialing 1+. FYI, Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands have an issue open at the Industry Numbering Committee (INC) seeking assignment of area codes so they can be included in the NANP. Mexico used to have two area codes (one for Mexico City, and one for northern Mexico), but they were "reclaimed" so they could be used for relief for exhausting domestic area codes. Some of the Caribbean nations (e.g., the Bahamas, Bermuda) have requested and been assigned area codes. When those are turned up they will no longer be part of the 809 NPA. The rates charged are the result of the decisions made by the individual service provders (e.g., AT&T, Sprint, MCI, etc.). Ron Havens Sprint ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Nov 95 17:38:01 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote: > Adding NXX area codes was always part of the plan, it's just > happening sooner than originally expected. Most of the screwups are > due to myopic PBX owners being unwilling to upgrade their equipment, > often because inept or less than honest PBX vendors didn't tell them > that it'd be necessary. Actually the NXX codes are going into service exactly when predicted in the Bell System _Notes on Distance Dialing_, 1974 edition. Not bad, for predicting 20 years into the future. And it's worth pointing out that among those "inept or less than honest PBX vendors" are AT&T and Nortel, both of whom were fully aware of the 1974 timescale and what to do about it. I'd add "greedy" to the list of adjectives. Tony H. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 95 08:36:40 EST From: hhs@teleoscom.com (Chip Sharp) Subject: Caller ID Specs Needed I need the specs for delivering Caller ID over POTS lines. I'm sure there is a Bellcore or some other spec available somewhere. Could someone send me a pointer in the right direction? Thanks. Hascall H. ("Chip") Sharp Teleos Communications, Inc. Sr. Systems Engineer 2 Meridian Road Eatontown, NJ 07724 USA voice: +1 908 544 6424 fax: +1 908 544 9890 email: hhs@teleoscom.com web: http://www.teleoscom.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 10:33:17 EST From: Steve Samler Subject: Email Over The Phone (Part 2) I neither work for or represent either of these firms. Just passing on info their press releases. Enhanced Systems announced on October 30 a software module that would allow one to access and manage e-mail, voice mail, fax and pages via the WWW. The product also operates over TCP/IP. A Netscape or Mosaic browser is needed. First release is Feb. 96. Although the press release doesn't say exactly, one would presume that you would also need hardware from them as well as the software. Compuserve and Premier Communications announced a product called CallingAll Card on the 26th. The product let's you dial in to re-direct e-mail to a fax machine. Future features include picking up voice mail and faxes from your e-mail box. ------------------------------ From: Percy Cave Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 15:35:45 +0000 Subject: Re: TCP/IP Specifications Dear Mr. Townson: I am trying to locate the file which contains the specifications pertaining to tcp/ip cited in archieve release of 10/27/95. I tried finding this file at your ftp site: ftp.lcs.mit.edu, but I could not find the filename: tcp/ip specifications. Did I look in the wrong directory perhaps? please advise if you can. Confused, and somewhat lost. P.C. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Look for /technical/tcp.ip-specs. This got renamed for the Archives to get the slash '/' out of the name. A few other readers have likewise gotten confused by this. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jcr@creator.nwestattws.com (Jeffrey Rhodes) Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Date: 2 Nov 1995 01:07:22 GMT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. Reply-To: jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com In article 17@massis.lcs.mit.edu, Lisa R. Owen writes: > I'd like to know how to have more than one cellular phone on the same > phone line. As far as I know, this is legal under FCC guidelines (I > want to make sure of this, though), but the primary service provider > (Southwestern Bell, for example) can't provide that reprogramming > service for you. I don't know of any companies in the St. Louis area > that provide this service, or exactly how they would be classified (a > friend of mine just had this done in Atlanta). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Everything I have heard about this and > all the discussions we have had about it here in the past would seem > to indicate you are *wrong*. More than one phone per number is a > definite no-no where cellular companies are concerned. Perhaps readers > with more specifics on this will write you direct and explain it. PAT] It is not legal to have two cellphones with the same ESN. Since the easiest way to get an extension cellphone is to "clone" the ESN, Lisa is warned that operating a cloned ESN cellphone is also illegal. Cellular switch vendors provide a cell-phone extension feature that uses the same cellular number (MIN) on two phones, each with different ESNs. This is legal but most carriers don't offer the service since it works poorly at best, within a carrier's own market, and looks like a cellular ESN tumbler to roaming markets that can disable the MIN/ESN on a national basis! These limitations are hard to explain to customers who want reliable service without unintended interruptions, hence few (if any) carriers offer this FCC-approved extension service. So it is not illegal to have two cellular phones with the same MIN and different ESNs, provided the cellular carrier is willing to support this operation. Most carriers will not support this operation and will permanently disable any MIN/ESN pair that they don't recognise! Anyone purporting to offer "two cell phones, same number" without the carrier's consent, is obviously offering illegal "cloned cell-phones" in which both cell-phones share the same MIN and ESN. The ESN is assigned by the original cell-phone manufacturer and it is a federal crime to alter this internally stored number. It is a federal crime to operate a cell-phone that has had the ESN altered or has an ESN that has been fraudulently assigned. It's hard to believe that nearly every day someone asks "are two cell-phones, one number legal?". P.T. Barnum suggested that there is a sucker born every minute. Basic judgment should tell people "if it's too good to be true, then it isn't". Now that cellular fraud busts are making news and some are behind bars, maybe the word will get out that: "Yes, the FCC approves extension line service for cell-phones but No, you can't have it because it looks too much like fraud when roaming." Jeffrey Rhodes at jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: Holling@intech-group.com (Ernie Holling) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 11:19:46 GMT Subject: 900 Mhz Headset Wanted From: Holling@intech-group.com (Ernie Holling) Hi, We're looking for a 900Mhz headset which has all the electronics in a holster with a light weight headset attached. If you are aware of one, please let us know brand and model. Thanks for the help. Ernie Holling Holling@Intech-Group.com The InTech Group, Inc. (610)-524-8400 Telecommunications Consultants FAX:(610)-524-8440 75 East Uwchlan Avenue, Exton, PA 19341 A Member of The Society of Telecommunications Consultants MultiMedia Telecommunications Association Building Industry Consulting Service International ------------------------------ From: jackeagle@aol.com (Jackeagle) Subject: Re: Use Analog Modem on Digital Line? Date: 1 Nov 1995 21:20:37 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: jackeagle@aol.com (Jackeagle) It is not cost effective or easy, but it can be done if the line is 64Kb or better (like ISDN). the modem has to be put in front of the analog to digital converter. Jack Warner Ken-Caryl Ranch, Colorado ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #461 ****************************** From ptownson Thu Nov 2 09:48:49 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA08683; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:43:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:43:13 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511021443.JAA08683@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #462 Status: R TELECOM Digest Thu, 2 Nov 95 09:43:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 462 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (Joe J. Harrison) U.S. Publisher Comments on China's Computer Industry (hshen@gac.edu) Re: TELECOM Digest V15 #453 (Thaddeus Cox) Re: FAX Machine as Page Scanner - fax_scan.pcx (Collin Park) US Phone Usable in France? (Chester Howes) Looking For Telephone With Call Blocking (Stephen Chin) Re: New Area Code Shows Up on Caller-ID (Alan Lange) Re: Area Code Authoritative List (Stan Schwartz) Re: Area Code Authoritative List (David Esan) Area Code Split in 617 and 508 (MA) (Scott D. Fybush) Two New Area Codes For Eastern MA (Jonathan Welch) Still More Area Code Information (Ronald D. Havens) Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? (David Esan) Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service (Michael D. Sullivan) Trying to Locate Konnex Corp (Georg Schwarz) GTE Actions (Steven Lichter) Make That Address Change! (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joe.J.Harrison@bra0119.wins.icl.co.uk Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 12:25:13 +0000 Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Everything I have heard about this and >> all the discussions we have had about it here in the past would seem >> to indicate you are *wrong*. More than one phone per number is a >> definite no-no where cellular companies are concerned. Perhaps readers >> with more specifics on this will write you direct and explain it. PAT] > It is not legal to have two cellphones with the same ESN. But only in the US? I was very surprised to discover that Vodafone in the UK could not care less about this on their analog (E-TACS) system. A friend told me his local dealer was advertising this as a legitimate service (just bring in some old cellphone and we'll fix it to work on the same number as your existing connected one). It sounded to me like some kind of scam, and I didn't want my fairly telecom-clueless friend to get burned somehow, so I called Vodafone Customer Care and asked their advice. Vodafone told me they did not particularly care for people doing it and their network might occasionally blacklist one or both of the phones if they were turned on simultaneously in different locations. But that was it, not illegal or contrary to their conditions of service. So my friend went ahead, it worked fine for him and still does. The UK does have the same huge cloning phraud problem as does the US, at least on the analog stuff which is still fairly widespread. Even for cloners it is not illegal to mess with ESNs and MINs and equipment to do this is on open sale -- the criminality only comes in with any actual attempt (or intent?) fraudulently to obtain service. Joe ------------------------------ From: hshen@gac.edu Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 20:02:18 -0600 Subject: U.S. Publisher Comments on China's Computer Industry Source: Reuters Reported by: Ray ZHANG, Liedong ZHENG [CND, 10/28/95] Poor telecommunications and low income are becoming more and more prominent and serious problems in the face of China's emerging computer market, said a top U.S. publisher on Saturday. In an interview with Reuters, Patrick McGovern, chairman of International Data Group (IDG), remarked that today's computing advances are making information more valuable than ever. McGovern asserted that information is often "the more profitable part of industry. ... The Airline Guide is more valuable than the airlines. ... TV Guide was sold for $2.5 billion, [making it] more valuable than any TV network." "The limitation is the limited amount of telephone line capacity," said McGovern. At present, only 3.1 percent of China's households have access to a telephone. It is China's aim to achieve nearly eight percent penetration by the year 2000 by installing 100 million telephone lines over the next five years. Despite its limitations, China's computer industry is growing 30 to 50 percent each year. The state has also allowed numerous connections to be made on to the Internet. Following the initiation of market reform under DENG Xiaoping, IDG quickly entered the China market in 1980, and became the first Sino-U.S. joint venture in China. Today, IDG, a publisher of more than 250 technology- related magazines and newspapers in 68 countries, is one of the few firms allowed to own a publishing business in China. More importantly, it is one of the very few companies that has prospered in China despite the relative immaturity of the computer industry. With an average annual increase of 65 percent, IDG's revenue from China surpassed $50 million in 1994, comprising 4.2 percent of its $1.2 billion global revenues. On Saturday, IDG's chairman Patrick McGovern met with DENG Pufang, the son of paramount leader DENG Xiaoping. DENG praised IDG for raising China's awareness of the computer industry. McGovern praised Beijing for "embracing information technology five times faster than anyone expected." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 21:39:17 -0800 (PST) From: Thaddeus Cox Subject: Re: TDD For Payphone Use > to locate a TDD that can be used on a pay phone. Either new or used, > what I understand it can be a booth or compact. I got a $1300 dollar > price on a booth (half booth if you will) and a $280 dollar price on a > compact from Graybar, and we as a poor university cannot afford such > high prices. I don't know what the LEC in 210 has to offer, but here in Oregon USWest has standard Western Electric coin phones with a slide-out drawer containing a TDD, wired into the phone. Perhaps the gentleman would be able to convince his telco to install one on the premises? I assume this is being done to comply with Americans with Disabilities act or some such legal requirements. Thaddeus Cox - coxt@sparky.oit.osshe.edu ------------------------------ From: collin@hpycla.kobe.hp.com (Collin Park) Subject: Re: FAX Machine as Page Scanner - fax_scan.pcx Date: 2 Nov 1995 04:27:58 GMT Organization: HP Asia Pacific Product Operations, Kobe, Japan > located as /technical/fax.machine.page.scanner. Remember, it is > a .pcx file and it would be a good idea to set the transfer type to > 'I' (binary) when getting it using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. PAT] Apparently on 10/22 the ftp archives were moved from "lcs.mit.edu" to "ftp.lcs.mit.edu"; of course the file is really at /telecom-archives/technical/fax.machine.page.scanner Thanks and best regards, collin [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are quite right on this. Somehow I got it wrong in the message. I guess after so many years of the archives at the one address, it is easy to type the wrong thing and then not catch it in the proofreading. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chester Howes Subject: US Phone Usable in France? Date: Wed, 1 Nov 95 22:30:01 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) A customer at my local Radio Shack said he had sent a phone to a friend in Paris and the then found out the plug (US modular) wouldn't fit the jack in Paris. He want an adapter to mate the two. I told him I thought the phone systems were not even compatible; a phone made for the US market would probably not even work on the French phone system. Could anyone please advise if the systems are close enough for the phone to work there? TNX, Chester F. Howes ------------------------------ From: gencom@airmail.net (Stephen Chin) Subject: Looking For Telephone With Call Blocking Date: Thu, 02 Nov 1995 06:19:54 GMT Organization: General Communications Does anyone know of a telephone manufacturer that makes a phone which can block out numbers by putting in a code? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you referring to the *67 code used to block Caller-ID? There are a couple of companies which made adjunct devices to plug in before the phone which do this. When the phone goes off hook, the little device automatically sends out *67 at the start of the dialing string. Or did you have something else in mind? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 22:06:43 EST From: Alan Lange Subject: Re: New Area Code Shows Up on Caller-ID > David A. Cantor > The new area code 860 showed up today, 10/31, for the first time on my > caller ID unit on a local call. The last local call I received with > the old area code 203 was on 10/29. I, too, got 860 for the first time this past weekend, but only from the Bristol area prefix (860-548). Calls from Hartford and Farmington areas (860- 677, 674, 277, 258, 289, 313) as well as some other areas still report area code 203. It seems they are converting prefixes one at a time. Up until MCI turned it off, I got code 203 from both work (677) and home (667) at 800-my-ani-is. Alan Lange PGP keyID: bea6e65d Finger Print: 9edb0db49acf05d b2067981 20b42201 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It has been reported here recently that 800-MY-ANI-IS is no longer in service. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Re: Area Code Authoritative List Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 23:08:08 -0500 Stuart Zimmerman <0007382020@mcimail.com> wrote: > The list sent in by bkron@netcom.com (BUBEYE!) was well done but > slightly incomplete. Area code 441 is is not the Caribbean and Puerto > Rico. It is actually Bermuda (which is not part of the Caribbean). > Area code 860 for Connecticut was missing. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That lack of 860 might have been my > fault in the editing process. I had a terrible time getting that > message edited. PAT] Then lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) commented: > Well, actually, there are two corrections. > 441 PUERTO RICO & CARIBBEAN (description of 441 deleted) > 562 CALIFORNIA > This area code is not yet in service, pending revision by the CPUC. > (The test numbers may work, but there are no "real" numbers yet.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And yet Linc, even with your eagle > eyes for accuracy, you apparently overlooked 860 which got left out > somehow. I'll tell you, these new area codes are a real pain to try > and keep up with aren't they. PAT] A pain indeed! Lest we forget 864 which, according to today's report on WBTV in Charlotte goes into service on 12/3/95 for Northwestern South Carolina (the areas including and surrounding Greenville and Spartanburg). WBTV gave the already-tired report about PBX systems that can't handle the new-format area codes. Stan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, and did you think that was all? Nope, just as soon as the list gets printed, still more news on the changing area code scene is recieved here at Digest Headquarters. Read on for still more. PAT] ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Area Code Authoritative List Date: 2 Nov 95 12:59:01 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY In article bkron@netcom.com (BUBEYE!) writes: > 441 PUERTO RICO & CARIBBEAN This should read BERMUDA. David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ From: fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) Subject: Area Code Split in 617 and 508 (MA) Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 04:09:10 GMT NYNEX is beginning preparations for splits and/or overlays in both Eastern Massachusetts area codes, 617 and 508 (which was a geographic split from 617 in 1988). NYNEX says 617 will be exhausted by 1999, and 508 by 2000, according to current projections, and so splits or overlays in both are needed by late 1997. No word yet on what the new codes will be, or how things will split up, but I'd bet on an overlay for 617, which is a reasonably compact urban core surrounding and including Boston. A geographic split would be difficult, and could end up creating a second ring around Boston with a new code, leaving 617 serving only the city of Boston and a few neighboring areas (Cambridge, Somerville, and Brookline perhaps.) An overlay would make more sense here. In 508, which forms a wide arc around Boston, a geographic split would be logical, perhaps with 508 remaining with the northern and western portions of the code, and a new code being assigned to the fast-growing area south of Boston, including Cape Cod. An overlay would make less sense in 508. The NYNEX official I spoke with today says none of the company's other New England NPAs (207 Maine, 603 N.H., 802 Vermont, 401 Rhode Island, and 413 Western Mass.) are in any danger of exhaustion. 413, in particular, is now slated for exhaustion in 2030! Scott Fybush - fybush@world.std.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Nov 1995 08:31:18 -0500 From: Jonathan_Welch Subject: Two New Area Codes For Eastern MA This morning on WBZ radio (Boston, MA) there was a brief news blurb that due to the explosion of faxes, modem, pagers, etc. it would be necessary to add two new area codes. Overlaying them was mentioned, but not if they'd both go to help out 617 (Boston area) or 508 as well. Discussion wasn't planned to begin until next year. Jonathan Welch VAX Systems Manager Umass/Amherst JHWELCH@ecs.umass.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 20:56:18 -0500 From: RONALD.D.HAVENS@sprint.sprint.com Subject: Still More Area Code Information The FCC Common Carrier bureau has a factsheet on their home page that shows planned area codes and effective dates. Try http://www.fcc.gov/bureaus/common_carrier/factsheets/areacode.txt Ron Havens Sprint ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? Date: 2 Nov 95 13:07:33 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY In article ezx@ix.netcom.com (Ed Marion) writes: > Does anyone know why Countries like Canada, Bermuda > the British Virgin Islands, and the Carribean in general are > all accessible from within the USA with a 1 + Area Code + number? It is possible that this is also a result of both the Canadian and the US phone companies being owned by the same people. Bell would probably view this area as a single entity, and wanted to integrate the network. While there are many differences between the US and Canada, the similarities, particularly in the 1940s and 1950s were quite striking. The languages are nearly identical, a shared British heritage (which we reject, and then spent many years trying to emulate), the geographic divisions (Eastern population, Central Plains and Western Mountains and coast). Add to this the fact that 90+% of the Canadian population lives within 200 miles of the US border, suggests that the two countries have an integrated calling pattern. David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ From: mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) Subject: Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service Date: 2 Nov 1995 05:46:45 GMT Organization: Wilkinson, Barker, Knauer & Quinn Reply-To: mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you talking about Beehive? I think > that is its name. One employee/owner and eight subscribers. PAT] Yep. Beehive Telephone Co., formerly Silver Beehive Telephone Co., formerly The Telephone Co., owned by Arthur W. Brothers. Not certain he only has eight subscribers, though. Michael D. Sullivan Email to: mds@access.digex.net Bethesda, MD, USA Also: avogadro@well.com 74160.1134@compuserve.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well he may have more than eight customers now; that's what he had a few years ago. I don't think he will be applying for a new area code any time soon however. PAT] ------------------------------ From: georg@marie.physik.tu-berlin.de (Georg Schwarz) Subject: Trying to Locate Konnex Corp. Date: 2 Nov 95 07:55:10 GMT Organization: Berlin University of Technology Does anyone the address of Konnex Corp., USA (preferably their e-mail address, if they have one)? They are said to be the manufacturer of acoustic coupler modems for wireless telephones. I'd also like to know an adress of a representative/distributor for their products in Germany. Thanks. Georg Schwarz (schwarz@physik.tu-berlin.de, kuroi@cs.tu-berlin.de, PGP 2.6ui) Institute for Theoretical Physics +49 30 314-24254 FAX -21130 IRC kuroi Berlin University of Technology http://itp1.physik.tu-berlin.de/~schwarz ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: GTE Actions Date: 1 Nov 1995 17:19:06 -0800 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University Below is the way that certain people in power at GTE treat employees. I have tried to work out the problem with no effect so I am now putting it in a public forum for all to see. If you want you can call GTE and let them know how you feel. You can contact the Chairman Chuck Lee in Stanford, Conn, Telephone Operatins in Dallas, Texas or GTE West in Thousand Oaks. I'm not going to list any phone numbers as GTE may try and claim I am violating some ethics since they could say I used company property to get the information. In early 1992 GTE received a Notice of Levy from the IRS. When I got my copy I notified GTE by certified letter, company mail and telephone that a Federal Court stay was in place. GTE already was aware of the stay. For some reason that I never was told something went wrong and my wages were taken for this levy, when this happened both my attorney at the time and myself advised GTE of that fact, yet 2 weeks later they were again taken. GTE was notified in plenty of time to stop the levy the first time and took no action, they again did the samething a second time even after they had said it was an error. This action caused me many problems with a loss of about $100,000.00 at the time, this has since increased to almost $250,000.00. GTE through its legal department offered to help me recover the money from the IRS. They found out that is would cost more to recover it then to just pay me. their offer was to pay me the lost wages if I agreed not to sue them. At this point I could not agree to this offer since my loss was much more then what they had offered. They then hired an outside attorney to settle this matter. They had agreed to cover my losses if I could prove that it was their erro, they already said it was and we were asked to supply copies and proof of all my losses; we did this and yet no action was done dispite repeated requests. Since I could no longer afford to fight them; I believe this was their plan all the time, but I have no proof. I have somewhat recovered from the damage that GTE had done to me and again I have attempted to settle this matter plus another one that has occured. I have given GTE one last chance to settle this matter before bringing it to the public via The Internet. If you are reading this through one of the newsgroups you know that I was unable to settle this. I will be sending copies of this to officers of GTE as well as others in an effort to force GTE to bring a settlement. As many you know I have defended GTE and helped some set problems cleared up, some in public, but most via E-mail as I felt it would be better that way. I will continue to help since the majority of GTE people want to help and have nothing to do with this problem. Please don't E-mail me as I may not be able to reply, you may make your comments in the Newgroups since GTE does monitor these groups for anything with GTE in it The above are my ideas and have nothing to do with whoever my employer is. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II. slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Make That Address Change! Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:00:00 EST Incoming mail is indicating that although quite a few of you have made the requested address changes for the Digest and the Archives, there are still many readers using the old and now incorrect address. Please make these changes today if you have not already done so: ALL mail to TELECOM Digest including subscription requests and editorial submissions is to be sent to: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Pointers in the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup should be directed in the same way. If you need to have a personal address for email to me, you can use: ptownson@remarque.berkeley.edu. The Telecom Archives is located on the same machine as the Digest; but in the case of the archives we refer to it as: ftp.lcs.mit.edu Same place; ftp.lcs.mit.edu is an alias for massis.lcs.mit.edu. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #462 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 3 01:23:41 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA21034; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 01:23:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 01:23:41 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511030623.BAA21034@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #463 Status: R TELECOM Digest Fri, 3 Nov 95 01:23:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 463 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Multiple Phones on Cellular Line (Gary Novosielski) Re: Old Los Angeles Prefixes (Gordon Winston) Re: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager (Dan Fandrich) Re: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager (Jeffrey C. Honig) Re: AT&T Switch Access via PC (Steve O'Brien) Re: Another UK Number Change (Rachael Rosen) Names Wanted at PUC - Colorado (cccef.bgriffis@capital.ge.com) Problem With AT&T Access in Italy (Mary Leugers) Re: Story From PacBell Very Doubtful (R.R.M. Tweek) Re: Still More Area Code Information (David F. Reynolds) Re: Still More Area Code Information (Linc Madison) Re: When was the Coiled Phone Cord Invented? (Matthew B. Doar) Re: Split-T or Fractional T-1 Device w/ocu/bri Interfaces (larb0@aol.com) Re: Using *69 To Get Caller's ID (Hugh Pritchard) Re: 1+ Dialing To Canada and The Caribbean (Linc Madison) Re: Trying to Locate Konnex Corp. (Michael Schuster) Re: Need Information on Reducing Power Consumption (Jeffrey Rhodes) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gary.novosielski@sbaonline.gov Organization: Small Business Administration Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 22:31:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Reply-to: gnovosielski@mcimail.com Jeffrey Rhodes writes: > It's hard to believe that nearly every day someone asks "are two > cell-phones, one number legal?". P.T. Barnum suggested that there is a > sucker born every minute. Basic judgment should tell people "if it's > too good to be true, then it isn't". Now that cellular fraud busts are > making news and some are behind bars, maybe the word will get out > that, "Yes, the FCC approves extension line service for cell-phones but > No, you can't have it because it looks too much like fraud when roaming." On the contrary, I think "basic judgment," or common sense, is what's behind these questions in the first place. What's hard for most people to comprehend (which accounts for the continual repetition of this question), is why it should be illegal to have a second (cloned ESN) phone even when no fraud is intended or attempted. That's what defies common sense. Until the FCC made it illegal (as we are told they did recently) it worked just fine in practice. It even worked fine while roaming, and didn't "look like fraud" at all, for the simple reason that it *wasn't* fraud. It was just a way to make legal phone calls, using one's own bona fide cellular account, and to pay for them in full, using either of two phones (both bought-and- paid-for) instead of just one. Certainly, using a cell phone modified to fraudulently bill someone else's account *should* be illegal (and would be, with or without FCC rule-making), but just to be sure, let's raid and bust all those "suckers" with the audacity to ask why they can't use their own second phone on their own account! Basic judgment just might be telling these people that the real (only?) reason such cloning was made "illegal" is that it deprives wireless carriers of their presumed "right" to charge double the revenue while they incur no additional expense. This might be called their "right" to treat their customers like ignorant suckers. Having two phones with the same number is intrinsically no more "fraudulent" than hooking up an extension phone in one's own home. Old Timers will recall that back when AT&T "Wireful" ruled the known world, this too was called "illegal". (for the same reason?) And why should it be? Every call made or received gets billed to the appropriate parties. No, I cannot make two calls at once, as I am only paying for one "line"; if I want that feature, I must pay for a second line. And of course if I hook up nine or ten extensions, there may not be enough voltage to ring the bells any more. But if I'm willing to live with the limitations, and it is not technically infeasible, then why *should* it be illegal to have an extension phone on the same number, either wired, or cellular. Granted it is, but why *should* it be? Certainly not just because Congress says so. Once upon a time, Congress said freeing slaves was illegal, too. Just because someone who clones their own phone can be put "behind bars" doesn't mean they belong there. Some will argue that it is because cloning might be, or could be, or would be (and let's face it -- ACTUALLY IS) used for fraud. If so, then rocks, hammers, computers, and telephones themselves should be outlawed. In fact, everything should be outlawed, because there isn't an object I can think of that someone, somewhere could not figure out how to use in the commission of a crime. Crimes -- actual crimes -- already are and should be illegal. "Potential" crimes, like fictional characters, do not exist. Let's get a grip. The fact that the "legal" cell-extension variant, i.e., same MIN, different ESN, is something the cell carriers can and do charge extra for is no coincidence. And the fact that it doesn't work as well as simply cloning the phone is ironic. Whose fault is that? Who designed the system, the ignorant suckers in the general public, or the high-priced talent within the industry? Two-ESN roaming doesn't "look like fraud" at all, any more than all Arab- Americans "look like" terrorists, or vice versa. It's just that the system we're relying on is so badly designed that it can't tell fraud from legal use. That's the fault of the system designer, not the innocent user. The user did not ask for a second-rate system. PT Barnum might well be amused at the sucker-per-minute birth rate of those in the wireless industry who staked their companies' future revenues on a technology that any bright fourteen-year-old could hack. Making a blunder of that magnitude is pretty embarassing. Sure, we all make mistakes, and then we live with them. But what arrogance to blame others (the non-suckers) for asking perfectly reasonable questions, or gleefully to make criminals of those with perfectly reasonable answers. An apologetic tone, not an arrogant one, from the wireless carriers would seem more appropriate to me. Don't get me started . GaryNovosielski GPN Consulting gnovosielski@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: gwinston@ior.com (Gordon Winston) Subject: Re: Old Los Angeles Prefixes Date: 3 Nov 1995 02:06:47 GMT Organization: Internet On-Ramp, Inc. Michael Hollomon, Jr. (mhollomo@ix.netcom.com) wrote: > In article , gershwin@hollywood.cinenet. > net says: >> Does anyone know of a source of information where one can find the >> verbal representations of prefixes in the Metro L.A. area? For >> example, in the fifties and early sixties, many Miracle Mile-area >> prefixes were designated as WEbster-x-xxxx; many of those "93" >> prefixes are still in use today. I would like to know what the verbal >> designations of those prefixes were. > I know that the Crenshaw district's 29 prefix was called AXminster. > That's about all I know. There was also another called RIchmond. But > I don't know what part of town that was in. If you find out others, > please email me. I'd like to know. Los Angeles: 22 = capital 23 = adams 25 = clinton 26 = angeles 29 = axminster 38 = dunkirk 46 = hollywood 62 = madison 65 = melrose 66 = normandy 72 = rampart 73 = republic 74 = richmond 75 = plymouth 75 = plesent 78 = sunset These are the only one's that I can think of off the top of my head. Others exist but usually relate to a street name. Ex Chief Deskman (Webster Office) ... That position existed when the telephone company cared about service. Gordon Winston, Spokane Wa. ------------------------------ From: dan@fch.wimsey.bc.ca (Dan Fandrich) Subject: Re: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager Date: Fri, 03 Nov 95 00:25:01 GMT Organization: Fandrich Cone Harvesters Ltd. In article albre011@maroon.tc.umn.edu writes: > I am looking for Unix sources to send messages to an alphanumeric > pager. I've been told that there was one posted a while back, perhaps > to alt.sources. Does anyone know a location for this, or an > approximate posting date? There is an indexing service for some of the source newsgroups and the larger ftp archives available at . You can search any of probably two dozen indices and newsgroups and are presented with a list of matching programs and the sites they are available. The alt.sources links, however, are broken since the archiving sites seem to have moved to a newer method of storing articles. Still, the information provided is enough to find the software you want. I know Wimsey has some kind of email to pager gateway set up -- I don't know if the software is one of the products they sell, but you could try asking at sl@wimsey.com. dan@fch.wimsey.bc.ca / MIME email ok / finger danf@wimsey.com for pgp key ------------------------------ From: jch@nr-atp.cit.cornell.edu (Jeffrey C Honig) Subject: Re: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager Date: 02 Nov 1995 17:26:45 GMT Organization: Information Technologies/Network Resources; Cornell University; In article albre011@maroon.tc.umn. edu (Bruce Albrecht) writes: > I am looking for Unix sources to send messages to an alphanumeric > pager. I've been told that there was one posted a while back, perhaps > to alt.sources. Does anyone know a location for this, or an > approximate posting date? For that matter, are the ixo files in the > telecom-archives/technical directory adequate for writing one from > scratch? I hacked on an expect script that I found. You can find it via my home page http://nr-atp.cit.cornell.edu/~jch, or directly via ftp://nr-atp.cit.cornell.edu/pub/tools/beep-0.2.tar.gz. You'll need Tcl and expect install on your system to use it. Jeff ------------------------------ From: sobrien@ozma.jefferson.co.us (Steve O'Brien) Subject: Re: AT&T Switch Access via PC Date: 3 Nov 1995 04:54:29 GMT Organization: SuperNet Inc. (303)-296-8202 Denver Colorado Sean Doherty (sean.doherty@channel1.com) wrote: > I would like to use the PC and modem on my desk to access a System 75, > G2 and G3 switch. I've tried using Procomm Plus's ATT 4410 emulation > but something is funny with the keyboard. What software/emulations > are other tech's using? I have been using a Procomm Plus for Windows for some time to administer both G3 and Audix systems. The 4410 emulator in the Windows version of Procomm works fine. The older Procomm for DOS did not seem to understand the function key setup strings that the switch sends when you change from screen to screen. Another technique that works pretty well is to set Procomm for DOS to emulate a vt102, and then program the function keys using the Alt-f8 keyboard setup. Program f1 as ^[OP, f2 as ^[OQ, f3 as ^[OR etc. up to f8 as ^[OW. Then tell the switch you are a 4410 terminal, and ignore the weird characters at the bottom of each screen. Steve ------------------------------ From: Rachael@walrus.ftech.co.uk (Rachael Rosen) Subject: Re: Another UK Number Change Date: Fri, 03 Nov 1995 00:43:34 GMT Organization: Tyrrell Reply-To: Rachael@walrus.ftech.co.uk Clive D.W. Feather wrote: > The UK National Code Change, completed this April, was supposed to > solve our numbering problems for the forseeable future. Well, many of > us foresaw that other places were still running out of numbers. > Oftel announced recently that Reading numbers are about to change > again. 0734 XXXXXX became 01734 XXXXXX, and will now become 0118 9XX > XXXX. Parallel running will start in April 1996, with the final > changeover in January 1998. > According to posters in uk.telecom, there already exist 01734 90XXXX > and 01734 04XXXX numbers. No-one is sure how these will interact > during parallel running. Are you sure about 01734 04xxxx ? How can you have a Reading number starting with 04 ? What does a local caller dial for this ? Surely no exchange numbers in UK start with a zero ? The only nubers I believe *can* start with a zero are things like 0800 free calls and 0345 / 0645 local rate numbers. Rachael Rosen Sig minimalist. ------------------------------ From: cccef.bgriffis@capital.ge.com Subject: Names Wanted at PUC - Colorado Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 13:17:53 PDT Organization: GE Capital News Server Anyone out there know where to send a formal letter to the PUC in Denver, Colorado? I have an address and phone number (with eternal hold). A name would help! Need address and contact for business telecommunications related concerns. Primarily late delivery and poor problem determination/ resolution. ------------------------------ From: LEUGERS Mary Subject: Problem With AT&T Access in Italy Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 10:53:00 PST Are there any readers out there who regularly use the toll-free number in Italy to access AT&T USADirect service? For a couple weeks now I've had intermittant problems with the call dropping, and a message from Telecom Italia (Italian telco) coming on saying that the number has changed. There doesn't seem to be any pattern as to when the call drops, but some days it's so bad I can't get a call out. Any readers out there know who I might contact at AT&T to report the problem? Thanks, Mary Leugers Mary.Leugers@omnitel.it ------------------------------ From: tweek@netcom.com (R R M Tweek) Subject: Re: Story From PacBell Very Doubtful Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:25:55 GMT Bren Smith wrote: > She says that they can't be out with a service person until tomorrow. I > then ask them if they can remote call forward my dead primary line to my > secondary line (remembering what Linc has tried this in the past). > They tell me, and this is the real pisser part, that the PUC tariffs > prevent them from forwarding my line. When I asked why, the rep. explained > that it was to prevent "unfair competition". I'm thinking, "yeah, right > who else competes in the local exchange market?" "Unfair Competition" Keeps YOUR competitors from calling the telephone company and having the telco forward YOUR line to him ... much like what happened over the Christmas holiday last year, where a plumber had three or four of his competitors phones forwarded to his plumbing business ... after first calling up the phone company and ordering up Remote Call Forwarding for his competitors. Those victim plumbers had the loneliest Christmas ever. tweek@netcom.com tweek@tweekco.ness.com tweek@io.com DoD #MCMLX SP-3 Fodder-Line: Rogue Agent Hubbard Thetan Scientology Clear OT Course Clam http://www.io.com/~tweek/ tweek@ccnet.com OT-7 Dr. Doo's little Llama [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But you would think that telco could call the man back on a line they could get through on and verify with him that he wanted it done. PAT] ------------------------------ From: daver@teleport.com (David F. Reynolds) Subject: Re: Still More Area Code Information Date: 3 Nov 1995 00:11:33 GMT Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 The fact sheet in question dates from August, so has far less info than is already available here. Correct path is: http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Factsheets/areacode.txt ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Still More Area Code Information Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 17:43:12 GMT RONALD.D.HAVENS@sprint.sprint.com wrote: > The FCC Common Carrier bureau has a factsheet on their home page that shows > planned area codes and effective dates. Try > http://www.fcc.gov/bureaus/common_carrier/factsheets/areacode.txt Thanks for the tip, Ron. However, the URL as shown is incorrect. The capitalization is significant: FCC area code fact sheet Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ From: mdoar@acton.timeplex.com (Matthew B. Doar) Subject: Re: When was the Coiled Phone Cord Invented? Date: 2 Nov 1995 14:52:27 GMT Organization: Ascom Nexion I suspect that as soon as the plastic cords came out, someone must have coiled them. If you've never tried it, 200 degrees C for 20 mins, coiled tightly around a copper tube of the correct diameter and clipped on at both ends, worked well for me. Matthew B. Doar Ascom Nexion, Inc. mdoar@nexen.com 289 Great Road, +1 508 266 3468 Acton, MA 01720, USA ------------------------------ From: larb0@aol.com (LARB0) Subject: Re: Split-T or Fractional T-1 Device w/ocu/bri Interfaces Date: 2 Nov 1995 10:17:42 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: larb0@aol.com (LARB0) Not real sure about this, but check with AdTran ... they usually have a good selection of add/drop CSU/DSU devices for T1s. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Nov 95 10:55 EST From: Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Using *69 To Get Caller's ID An anonymous bspline writes, >> Can someone explain the exact workings of the Ameritech offering >> of "Call Back" as it is used from a single residential line. > The exact working in a 1AESS: > Associated with every line, there is a call store memory that has in > it, among other things, the number of the last person who called it. > ... Now, when you dial *69, the system just looks at yer call > store memory and completes a call between them and you. I wonder if this call store memory would contain the last number (ANI) of a long-distance call, the kind of call that shows "Out of area" on my CallerID box. Hugh Pritchard, Hugh_Pritchard@MCImail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My experience here has been that anything I cannot get on the caller ID box likewise cannot be re-connected using *69. In other words, if they had it for *69, they would give it to you on the caller ID box unless it was specifically marked private. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: 1+ Dialing To Canada and The Caribbean Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 17:33:26 GMT RONALD.D.HAVENS@sprint.sprint.com wrote: > Mexico used to have two area codes (one for Mexico City, and one for > northern Mexico), but they were "reclaimed" so they could be used for > relief for exhausting domestic area codes. Well, actually, Mexico used to have THREE area codes. 905 was used for Mexico City, 706 for northwest Mexico (Mexican city codes beginning with 6), and 903 for northeast Mexico. That's why I was a bit surprised to see 903 assigned for the 214 split when there were other N0/1X area codes still unassigned. I don't know exactly what the scope of those old Mexican area codes were; I know 706 included northern Baja, and 903 some of the border area with Texas, but I don't know, for example, whether they reached as far as Cabo San Lucas or Monterrey. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: Re: Trying to Locate Konnex Corp. Date: 2 Nov 1995 18:59:44 -0500 Organization: panix In article , Georg Schwarz wrote: > Does anyone the address of Konnex Corp., USA (preferably their e-mail > address, if they have one)? They are said to be the manufacturer of > acoustic coupler modems for wireless telephones. I'd also like to > know an adress of a representative/distributor for their products in > Germany. There is no Konnex Corp. The products you refer to are manufactured and marketed by: Unlimited Systems Corp. 5555 Magnatron Blvd, Suite J San Diego, CA 92111 (619) 277-3300 I have **NO** other contact information besides the above. Mike Schuster | schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM ------------------- | schuster@shell.portal.com | GEnie: MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com (Jeffrey Rhodes) Subject: Re: Need Information on Reducing Power Consumption Date: 2 Nov 1995 21:20:21 GMT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. Reply-To: jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com In article 9@massis.lcs.mit.edu, johnd@mail.ic.net (John N. Dreystadt) writes: > In article , lytan@alpha.ntu.ac.sg says: >> Does anyone have any ideas on how companies have tried to reduce >> power consumption on cellular phones? IS-136 "Digital Control Channel" provides a sleep mode negotiation with an IS-136 TDMA switch such that any page requests are synchronized with an IS-136 cellular phone's sleep pattern. Power consumption is reduced while sleeping. IS-136 cellular phones will be compatible with current analog and IS-54 TDMA switches. Someday this decade, AT&T will be able to offer telephone service in at least 80% of US homes and offices using IS-136 technology. Jeffrey Rhodes at jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #463 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sat Nov 4 01:49:20 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA22560; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 01:49:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 01:49:20 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511040649.BAA22560@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #464 Status: RO TELECOM Digest Sat, 4 Nov 95 01:48:30 EST Volume 15 : Issue 464 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Delay on Long Haul Circuits (Todd Martin) Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (via John Shaver) Bell Canada Files Residential ISDN (Ron Kawchuk) Michigan 313/810 to Get Overlaid! (Brian C. Shensky) ICS Busted for Securties, Mail and Wire Fraud (Tad Cook) Re: Chicago Ameritech Cellular PINs Required? (Dave Levenson) Anyone Have a Identa Ring/Ring Leader/Distinctive Ringing Box (J. Plescia) Powering the Optical Network Interface (Ted Quade) AT&T Employment in Wiltshire, UK (Anne Baillie) Lost Mail Due to Filter/Autoreply Problems (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Todd Martin Subject: Delay on Long Haul Circuits Date: 3 Nov 1995 16:50:29 GMT Organization: Silicon Systems We have a 128kbps circuit from California to Singapore. I estimate that we experience a 100ms delay. We would like to simulate the affects of increasing the bandwidth. The question is what can we expect for reasonable delay as the bandwidth increases. Is this reasonable and/or realistic: Bandwidth Delay ---------------- 128k 100ms 256k 50ms >512 30ms What I am confused about is how much is the delay dependent on bandwidth. If we were to increase the pipe to 256k would the delay be cut in half? I have heard that the 30ms delay is the (minimum) I could expect. What are others experiences with delays on long haul circuits? Todd Martin Silicon Systems, Inc. todd.martin@tus.ssi1.COM ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Nov 95 10:06:04 MST From: John Shaver Subject: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Forwarded FYI to the Digest: Comments by: Wendell Craig Baker A lot of people chatter about the amount of people in Europe who are seen wandering around chatting on their cellular phones. Why don't we have that level of service here ... etc. In Europe, the caller pays. In the U.S. the callee pays. This means you with the phone in your hand pay airtime charges for just answering the phone. Charges range from $0.50/min during daylight down to $0.25/min at night/weekends. Justice at last!!! W. Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 12:04:07 GMT From: Bell Atlantic To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Wireless Customers Can Save With Calling Party Pays FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: November 2, 1995 Paul Miller 804-772-1460 [paul.t.miller.jr.@bell-atl.com] WIRELESS USERS CAN NOW SAVE ON AIRTIME CHARGES ARLINGTON, VA -- Until now, wireless phone users have been charged for all calls made on their wireless phone -- even calls coming from unknown or unwelcome callers. Now, with a new service from Bell Atlantic, the person who calls the wireless user is charged for those calls. Bell Atlantic's new Calling Party Pays service allows cellular companies to give their customers the option of having the caller pay the airtime charges. The announcement came today at Bell Atlantic's Carrier Services annual Wireless Forum in Washington, D.C. "Bell Atlantic's Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) makes this service possible," said Peter D'Amico, senior product manager for Bell Atlantic's Carrier Services line of business. "Bell Atlantic is the first to develop Calling Party Pays service that offers the flexibility of AIN-based features. This allows us to offer our wireless carriers a service that helps them meet the needs and requirements of their customers." Normally, incoming calls to cellular numbers are routed to the appropriate Bell Atlantic access tandem switch, serving a cellular carrier's mobile switching center. The tandem switch recognizes the called number as a cellular number and routes the call directly to the cellular carrier, which then completes the call to its cellular customer. With Calling Party Pays, incoming calls to wireless subscribers will be screened by the AIN platform to determine the proper call processing and billing instructions. An announcement will notify callers that they will be charged for the airtime. Callers will be able to bypass the announcement by pressing the "#" key on their phone. If billing data for the phone number associated with the incoming call is not available, AIN will instruct the tandem switch to play another announcement notifying the caller that he or she will be routed to the cellular customers' voice mail box to leave a message. "This service will significantly increase the usefulness of wireless phones, " said John Campanola, director - wireless product management for Bell Atlantic. "Customers will want to give out their cellular numbers and may even list those numbers in the phone directory." By using AIN technology, Bell Atlantic minimized the number of calls for which the caller cannot be billed and developed a service with features not previously available. Customers who use Bell Atlantic's Calling Party Pays can keep their current cellular phone number. Other similar services have been limited to dedicated NXX numbers that required customers to change their cellular phone numbers to a particular exchange. Calling Party Pays also offers customers several unique call-management features: * VIP (very important person) Number -- Cellular customers can give a VIP number to family, friends and clients. Those callers then enter the VIP number when they hear the announcement, signaling the AIN platform to bill the called party for air time. * VIP Table -- Customers can select up to six telephone numbers from which the calling party will not pay for the air time of incoming calls. * Toggle Option -- Customers can use an on/off option to deactivate Calling Party Pays for a period of time. Research by the Yankee Group shows that 69 percent of cellular users think about the cost of a cellular call every time they pick up their cellular phone. Also, 78 percent of cellular users say they would encourage people to call them if they didn't have to pay for receiving the calls. "We believe that cellular service is headed toward a new paradigm of stimulating network usage," said Mark Lowenstein, director - Wireless and Mobile Communications for the Yankee Group. "Services such as Calling Party Pays are at the forefront of this effort to make wireless a way of life for everyone." The Bell Atlantic Carrier Services line of business provides switched, special and wireless access to Bell Atlantic's telecommunications network. Carrier Services also is developing new wireless services, such as personal communications services, new access services such as Facilities Management Service, and increased network survivability through Bell Atlanticr IntelliLightsm services. Bell Atlantic Corporation (NYSE: BEL) is at the forefront of the new communications, entertainment and information industry. In the mid-Atlantic region, the company is the premier provider of local telecommunications and advanced services. Globally, it is one of the largest investors in the high-growth wireless communication marketplace. Bell Atlantic also owns a substantial interest in Telecom Corporation of New Zealand and is actively developing high-growth national and international business opportunities in all phases of the industry. #### INTERNET USERS: Bell Atlantic news releases, executive speeches, news media contacts and other useful information are available on Bell Atlantic's media relations World Wide Web site (http://www.ba.com), by gopher (gopher://ba.com) or by ftp (ftp://ba.com/pub). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 07:47:31 -0500 From: kawchuk@io.org (Ron Kawchuk) Subject: Bell Canada Files Residential ISDN Bell Canada filed for residential ISDN on October 27, 1995 $51 to $57 per month for 2 ISDN channels. (2B+D) Pay per call in peak (Business day) times. $1 per hour 7AM to 7PM weekdays per 64k channel... $2 per hour for 128K bps?? Request CRTC approval for Dec 1, 1995 If approved, this would be a precedent for local measured service (LMS) in Canada. For details on LMS in Canada, check out the HALT home page: http://www.io.org/~kawchuk/ Bell Canada's home page is http://www.bell.ca/ Ron Kawchuk Telecom Consultant and HALT co-founder. Ph: 905 281-1998 Fax: 905 279-9418 Internet: kawchuk@io.org Home page: www.io.org/~kawchuk HALT Fax-on-Demand: 416 798-7121 access code 4258( HALT). ------------------------------ From: shensky@umd.umich.edu (Brian C. Shensky) Subject: Michigan 313/810 to Get Overlaid! Date: 2 Nov 1995 18:32:11 GMT Organization: University of Michigan I just got off the phone with Ameritech. Apparently, in March 1996, they will hold a conference to announce, presumably, two new overlaid area codes for 313/810. If you recall, 313 was geographically split into 313 below 8 Mile Rd. and 810 North of 8 Mile Rd. in August 1993. So in addition to the geo split, Michiganians have to get used to these two codes being overlaid! Ameritech does *not* know what the new area codes will be yet. Enjoy! Brian SHENSKYbrian 313.454.9603 (home) shensky@umich.edu (email) 313.780.3213 (page) http://www.umich.edu/~shensky (www) ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: ICS Busted for Securties, Mail and Wire Fraud Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 23:40:51 -0500 Ten from Boca Raton, Fla., Accused of Securities, Mail, Wire Fraud By Ronnie Greene, The Miami Herald Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Nov. 3--Boca Raton -- the upscale city known for its wealth, its lushness and its white-collar crime -- was the setting for a bustling boiler room that defrauded 144 investors of $2 million, authorities said Thursday. A federal grand jury returned a 71-count indictment accusing 10 defendants of securities fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and perjury. Five others have already pleaded guilty or plan to. They worked for International Communications Specialists, ICS, in a suite on West Palmetto Park Road. Their alleged scam: Selling unregistered securities to investors throughout the United States through a combination of lies and deceit. Using "lead lists" culled from other boiler rooms, salesmen called thousands of potential investors. Reading from scripts, they described ICS as an opportunity to "get in on the ground floor of the rapidly expanding wireless communications industry." Salespeople said ICS was offering interests -- at a cost of $10,000 to $17,000 apiece -- in revenues from mobile radio licenses and radio towers purportedly owned by ICS. The lie: ICS didn't own FCC licenses, as alleged, but merely options to purchase licenses. Still, salespeople described the investment as "safe" and inquired about the investor's net worth and past investments. "The information, as well as an assessment of potential investors' interest and perceived gullibility -- potential investors were often described as 'mooch' and 'controllable' -- were noted for use in further contacts with the potential investor," the indictment says. One principal allegedly used $11,225 of investors' money to buy jewelry for himself, his girlfriend and salespeople. The scam, which allegedly operated from September 1991 to February 1992, was investigated by the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Postal Inspection Service. The prosecutors are Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Murad and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Krudys. Those charged Thursday: Richard Weber, 49, and Ira DiCapua, 36, of Boca Raton; Jon Stewart, 41, and Ira Cohen, 48, of Fort Lauderdale; Michael Harvey, 48, of Pompano Beach; Dwayne Shepherd, 35, of Plantation; James Michaels, 42, of Lauderhill; Wayne Axelrod, 25, of Chicago; Gary Nakkula, 42, of Brighton, Mich.; and Brandon Rios, 24, of Trenton, N.J. Previously, ICS sales manager Edward Ruppert and salesmen Jason Ruppert and Richard Marshall pleaded guilty to securities fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud. Michael LaCue, a salesman, and Joseph Cunha, a paid reference for the firm, agreed earlier this week to plead guilty, the U.S. Attorney's Office said. ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Chicago Ameritech Cellular PINs Required? Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 03:54:46 GMT Andrew C. Green (acg@frame.com) writes: > I received a puzzling piece of mail from Ameritech recently which > seemed to imply (it was _very_ carefully worded) that I needed to > call them and set up a PIN for my cellphone service as part of their > Ongoing Battle Against Telecommunications Fraud. It did not actually > say that this was mandatory ... In the New York City area, PINs were introduced on an optional basis six months ago or so. They were optional, but with the subtle hint that if your cellular phone was `cloned' and you had not obtained a PIN, CellularOne (now called AT&T Wireless) would no longer drop the fraudulent charges from your bill. Recently, the use of a PIN has become mandatory for AT&T Wireless subscribers in the New York City area (SID 00025). As recommended, I have stored the PIN and its feature access code on a repertory-dial button on my cell phone, so it's only a single-button operation ... not too hard when driving. What bothers me about the PIN, however, is that it is sent out over the setup channel, in the clear, as part of the same access message that contains the mobile user's MIN and ESN. It probably won't take very long for the cloners to modify their listining equipment to capture the PIN along with the rest of the data they need. The PIN seems to be, at best, a temporary fix. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: Joe Plescia Subject: Anyone Have a Identa Ring/Ring Leader/Distinctive Ringing Box Date: 3 Nov 1995 14:19:03 GMT Organization: Plescia.Com Reply-To: jplescia@plescia.com Anyone have a identa ring / ring leader / distinctive ringing box for sale? Joseph P Plescia-Plescia Photo email jplescia@plescia.com 201.868.0065 201.868.0475fax ------------------------------ From: tquade@thud.unibase.com (Ted Quade) Subject: Powering the Optical Network Interface Date: 3 Nov 1995 15:17:52 GMT Reply-To: tquade@thud.unibase.com (Ted Quade) I am engaged in graduate research regarding the issue of powering the residential customer terminal equipment in an all-fibre (all-fiber) telephone system. I wish to make contact with other researchers in this area to exchange ideas and information. Please contact me via e:mail at tquade@thud.unibase.com or post to this news group as appropriate. Thanks for your time. Ted ------------------------------ From: Anne Baillie Subject: AT&T Employment in Wiltshire. Exciting Opportunities in GSM Date: Fri, 03 Nov 1995 12:53:48 GMT Organization: S-Com CSE AT&T requirements in Wiltshire. Exciting opportunities in GSM On the Web S-Com have been appointed as AT&T's recruitment advisers. AT&T have a continuous requirement for various roles within their GSM development centre in Malmesbury, Wiltshire. 16 People are currently required to be able to start from November onwards. Location Based in Malmesbury, Wiltshire. Some roles may involve working at AT&T sites in New Jersey,U.S.A. and Nurnburg,Germany. Project Development of the next generation of GSM Base Station equipment. This project is being jointly developed across three primary locations. Roles 1. To develop the layer of software that interfaces the cluster management software with the application. Experience in initialisation and recovery of high availability systems advantageous. Must be a good team player. 2. Two developers required to develop the layer of software that interfaces the applications with the platform software in a fashion that removes as many of the platform specific dependencies as possible. Knowledge of realtime operating systems. 3. Performance Specialist. To Measure, evaluate and enhance the performance of the GSM Base Station Controller. Previous experience in performance monitoring and enhancement in realtime systems required. Excellent communication skills. 4. Software developer to develop the layer of software that interfaces a suite of commercial communications protocol stacks with the GSM application software. Knowledge of communications protocols (SS7, X.25, LAPD, TCP/IP). 5. To develop the layer of software that interfaces a commercial database management package with the GSM application software. Knowledge of distributed database managers. Experience in database development in a realtime system. 6. Lab Support (2 positions). Needed to install and support the test models and associated support equipment to be used in the development of the GSM Base Station Controller. Previous experience in installation and support of test models essential. 7. Physical Designer. To pull together the various pieces that will make up the GSM Base Station Controller into an ETSI compliant package. Previous experience in physical design with ETSI requirements is required. 8. System Integrators (3 positions). Needed to co-ordinate the merging of software and hardware subsystems developed at the various locations involved in this project. Previous experience in integrating diverse hardware/software essential. 9. Project Manager. To co-ordinate and track the efforts of the Base Station Controller team. Experience in managing development projects (predominantly software) required. 10. System Architect. To help define the architecture for the next generation GSM Base Station Controller. Experience in either GSM or AMPS essential. Rates Good rates. Start date November onwards. Contract length 18 months. Other lures A new international development centre. Please email your CV to Anne Baillie or Margaret Davies Contact us direct on 01296 311449 S-Com CSE, Buckingham House, Buckingham Street Aylesbury, HP20 2LA Phone 01296-311411 Fax 01296-436895 General enquiries / CVs Visit our Web site ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Lost Mail Due to Filter/Autoreply Problems Date: Sat, 04 Nov 1995 01:15:00 EST If you wrote to me on Friday evening, and primarily if you sent your mail via the newsgroup, then you will need to send it again. I was working on getting the autoreply turned back on when a large bunch of incoming mail got zapped due to 'cat >' rather than 'cat >>'. The difficulty with attempting to make any repairs or adjustments to mail software here is the large volume of constantly flowing inbound mail to the Digest. One slight, small error in the way something is written, then you put it in place, and bam! There go a dozen letters in the bit bucket. Yet without the use of filters, manual scanning of it all would be impossible. A couple days ago, I was entering something new in /etc/aliases and forgot a simple colon. Zoom! There goes about forty pieces of mail back to their senders as 'user unknown' ... that sort of thing. I will be watching the autoreply and the filters very closely over the weekend to see if more mail is getting lost. In the meantime, if you sent me something Friday night, try try again! Finally, the usual reminder: *all* mail for the Digest is now to be addressed to "ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu". If you have not yet changed your records or your newsgroup pointers, please do so at this time. I am running parallel on mail with delta for another couple weeks or so, but will then discontinue receiving from that end. Just because I toss out large amounts of mail due to my own buggy software does not mean you should not be sending it to the correct address to start with! PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #464 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sat Nov 4 22:50:06 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA10939; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 22:50:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 22:50:06 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511050350.WAA10939@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #465 TELECOM Digest Sat, 4 Nov 95 22:07:07 EST Volume 15 : Issue 465 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 888 Code Startup Not Delayed (Greg Monti) Re: These Sleezeball Comapnies Are Killing Me (mjf@noreturn.ibm.com) Alaska Interexchange Bandwidth (Philip Treuer) Selective Answering Machine from the UK (Dave LeVasseur) Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (James E. Bellaire) Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada (Wes Leatherock) Re: Alpha Paging From DTMF Phone (Hendrik Rood) Re: US Phone Usable in France? (Lars Poulsen) Re: Looking For Telephone With Call Blocking (Sheri Stritof) Re: Trying to Get Info From 604-555-1212 British Colombia (Dan Fandrich) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 4 Nov 95 00:55:41 PST From: Greg Monti Subject: 888 Code Startup Not Delayed The electronic newsletter {Communications Today} reported in its November 1, 1995, issue that implementation of the new 888 toll-free code in North America will *not* be delayed from its intended start date of March 1, 1996. This was the reported consensus of a meeting at which "an Ameritech representative" advised the FCC that DSC Communications, the vendor providing the software patch required for Database Service Management, Inc.'s signal transfer points' (STP's) handling of the new numbers, would deliver that patch later than expected. In the meantime, the newsletter reported, some interexchange carriers expressed concern that Database Service Management might be "still too closely connected to the Bell companies." They did not want DSMI to be providing information on how many numbers each interexchange carrier holds. The {Communications Today} article notes that DSMI reported that the exhaust date for the availability of 800 toll free numbers currently is projected at April 20, 1996. As of October 29, 730,051 numbers remained available in the Service Management System 800 database. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cais.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So folks, get your 800 numbers while they last. Need a few more for anticipated projects in the future? Better get them now before its too late. Don't look to AT&T, Sprint or MCI for any; they play games with their largest customers pulling the strings. Go to one of the smaller vendors like Allnet, Call America or similar. Steve Betterly for example, at Call America tells me they still have an ample supply of 800's for their customers. Contact him at betterly@callamer.com if you want to get in on their MyLine 800 service. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mjf@NORETURN.raleigh.ibm.com Subject: Re: These Sleezeball Companies Are Killing Me! Date: 4 Nov 1995 19:01:44 GMT Organization: ISSC Southeast Region Reply-To: mjf@NORETURN.raleigh.ibm.com In , CASTALDI@flash.rowan.edu (Johnny Castaldi) writes: > Ever try to call Integretel (1-800-736-7500)? They tell you to call > back at midnight! I recently got slammed by Integretel and got the usual "call back some other time" on their 800#. I called my local telco (Bellsouth, formerly Southern Bell) to complain and they dialed the number for me and transferred me. Wouldn't you know it, I got through. I don't know if they have any kind of special dialing priveleges or if they just got lucky, but that worked for me. Later, Mike ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 10:44:06 -0900 From: treuerpj@alaska.net (Philip Treuer) Subject: Alaska Interexchange Bandwidth I'm writing from Alaska where most interexchange traffic is transported by satellite or microwave. Because of the high cost of service most interexchange voice traffic, which (I assume) in the lower 48 is carried on fiber over 64 Kbps circuits, is here compressed by the IXC's as much as five to one. In the future (after the interexchange networks are upgraded to digital), the IXCs say they will only guarantee data transmission over basic voice grade lines (i.e., using modem or fax) up to 9.6 kbps -- above that speed the IXC's have indicated that either the call will not go through or customers will have to pay extra for higher transfer rates. Currently rural to rural calls are generally limited to 4800 kbps data transmission (if that) using faxes and modems on voice grade circuits. What is the maximum bandwidth IXCs allow on voice grade calls in the lower 48? Do customers have to pay surcharges on swithched 56 or ISDN 64 Kbps voice calls that go over the interexchange network? Have any states attempted to define basic voice grade telephone service in such a way that guanantee customers the ability to transmit data at certain minimum speeds using fax and modems? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 15:50:27 CST From: Dave LeVasseur Subject: Selective Answering Machine From the UK In TELECOM Digest #460, Theodore Hong wrote: > I've recently moved from the US to the UK, and I brought my answering > machine with me. It's hooked up to the local switchboard here, and > the phone part works fine. I thought the answering machine part did > too, until I discovered that it didn't answer outside calls, only > internal ones. Now outside calls do have a different ringing pattern > (two rings instead of one), but I can't see what would cause the > answering machine to ignore calls from outside ...? The UK telephone system uses a third wire not found on (most) US telephone systems. The third wire is used to distribute the ringing signal, separate from the two wires that carry the voice signals. Your local switchboard use a similar arrangement which allows your machine to respond to the ringing signal, although it seems odd that an external ringing signal would be delivered in a manner different from that of an internal signal. The reason the third wire is used in the UK is due to a problem referred to as "bell tinkle" caused when rotary-dial systems falsely trigger a telephone's ringer. We call it "bell tapping" here in the US where it is less common (although on the increase) due to most calls being placed with DTMF tones. The three-wire method was introduced as a way of preventing burglars from being alerted when they triggered a store's automatic dialer. Evidently, thieves were able to escape capture by listening for "bell tinkle", a warning that the police were soon to be at the premises. I understand that a UK company makes a device called a "mod-tap" which makes the necessary conversion between three- and two-wire systems. This device reportedly sells for US$10 to US$15. Perhaps other TD readers will be able to provide more information on this company and its product. Dave LeVasseur Internet: dlevasseur@midcom.anza.com Midcom, Inc. Front Desk:+1 (605) 886-4385 Watertown, SD 57201 USA Fax: +1 (605) 886-3791 Amateur Radio: N0DL BBS: +1 (605) 882-0349 14.4-8-n-1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Nov 1995 03:47:33 -0500 From: James E. Bellaire Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Jeffrey Rhodes wrote: > It's hard to believe that nearly every day someone asks "are two > cell-phones, one number legal?". P.T. Barnum suggested that there is a > sucker born every minute. Basic judgment should tell people "if it's > too good to be true, then it isn't". Now that cellular fraud busts are > making news and some are behind bars, maybe the word will get out > that, "Yes, the FCC approves extension line service for cell-phones but > No, you can't have it because it looks too much like fraud when roaming." GaryNovosielski replied: > On the contrary, I think "basic judgment," or common sense, is what's > behind these questions in the first place. > What's hard for most people to comprehend (which accounts for the > continual repetition of this question), is why it should be illegal to > have a second (cloned ESN) phone even when no fraud is intended or > attempted. That's what defies common sense. What people need is a second phone, with its own MIN and ESN, and a cellco that is willing to give a multiple phone rate that is within reason. > Until the FCC made it illegal (as we are told they did recently) it > worked just fine in practice. It even worked fine while roaming, and > didn't "look like fraud" at all, for the simple reason that it > *wasn't* fraud. It was just a way to make legal phone calls, using > one's own bona fide cellular account, and to pay for them in full, > using either of two phones (both bought-and- paid-for) instead of just > one. Cloned phones worked fine? Tho identical phones both reporting back to the cellco for tracking didn't confuse the switch? > [SNIP] > Having two phones with the same number is intrinsically no more > "fraudulent" than hooking up an extension phone in one's own home. Having a second line installed with the same number costs money everywhere I have been. These are NOT extensions within a single building. Cell phones are 'extensions' from the MTSO. > Old Timers will recall that back when AT&T "Wireful" ruled the known > world, this too was called "illegal". (for the same reason?) Old timers will also remember that the demarks and switches have changed completely since the old ones. More havoc could have been done to the network by CPE in the old days than now. > And why should it be? Every call made or received gets billed to the > appropriate parties. No, I cannot make two calls at once, as I am only > paying for one "line"; if I want that feature, I must pay for a second > line. And of course if I hook up nine or ten extensions, there may not > be enough voltage to ring the bells any more. But if I'm willing to > live with the limitations, and it is not technically infeasible, then > why *should* it be illegal to have an extension phone on the same > number, either wired, or cellular. If you want any of your extensions across town you will PAY for them, per link. In my home town it is about the same price for an off premises extension as it is a single line business phone, except you don't have to pay all the government per line charges on the extension. Cloning ESN allows a customer to 'steal' the extension service. They still may pay for the calls, but they don't pay for the service. You are using more than one link through their network. > [SNIP] > Some will argue that it is because cloning might be, or could be, or > would be (and let's face it -- ACTUALLY IS) used for fraud. If so, then > rocks, hammers, computers, and telephones themselves should be > outlawed. In fact, everything should be outlawed, because there isn't > an object I can think of that someone, somewhere could not figure out > how to use in the commission of a crime. Crimes -- actual crimes -- > already are and should be illegal. "Potential" crimes, like fictional > characters, do not exist. Let's get a grip. Cloning is a practice, not an object. Verbs are crimes, nouns are not. > The fact that the "legal" cell-extension variant, i.e., same MIN, > different ESN, is something the cell carriers can and do charge extra > for is no coincidence. And the fact that it doesn't work as well as > simply cloning the phone is ironic. Whose fault is that? Who designed > the system, the ignorant suckers in the general public, or the > high-priced talent within the industry? The network was designed for SINGLE phones, not extensions. Not bad for 15-20 years ago. > Two-ESN roaming doesn't "look like fraud" at all, any more than all > Arab- Americans "look like" terrorists, or vice versa. It's just that > the system we're relying on is so badly designed that it can't tell > fraud from legal use. That's the fault of the system designer, not > the innocent user. The user did not ask for a second-rate system. To a system that uses a matched MIN-ESN as a user/password link, seeing a user with more than one password can be confusing. They should be able to tell their switches that user MIN can use phone ESN1, ESN2 and ESN3. Then the search engine matching MIN-ESN would have to be able to accept any valid entry. Get the software designers to work it out. A fair price should be paid for 'extension' phones, either wired off- premises or celluar. If you want a lock so that only one phone in your shared setup can make a call at a time then PAY for the software to do that. Otherwise PAY for the ability to use the phones independently. Cloning gives a FREE service to customers, without the provider's consent. It is the right of any company to sell their product at the price they want. It is NOT the right of the consumer to take product without paying that price. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Subject: Re: If Quebec Leaves Canada Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 00:46:00 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As far as phone service is concerned, > bear in mind the country of Newfoundland ceased being such back about > 1947 (I think that was the year) when it became a Canadian province. > The differences in phone service between then and now are so extreme > that an accurate comparison is impossible. Even our own experience > with Hawaii and Alaska over 35 years ago are hard to compare. They > were both assigned area codes shortly after their admission to > statehood. Oklahoma and Arizona became states in the early years of > this century; whatever limited phone service they had at that time > probably just continued in place, so remote from today's telecommun- > ications network were they. Actually, Pat, the first commercial telephone service in Oklahoma was established in 1879, three years after the telephone was invented. It was a toll line between Tahlequah (capital of the Cherokee Nation) and Muskogee. Before I retired from Southwestern Bell Telephone, the historical files for Oklahoma (compiled during the Great Depression when business was slow, partly by Pioneers [retired employees] and partly by active employees) was in my office, and I had many occasions to answer questions about it or to prepare various written (and in later years video) materials involving the company's history in Okalhoma. The first commercial telephone line was established by a group of (Indian) promoters, who applied to the Cherokee Nation for authority. The files included the text of the Cherokee Nation legislature's act authorizing the line, providing for a gross receipts tax, and earmarking the tax for the Cherokee Nation's common schools. It carried the signatures of the presiding officers of both houses of the legislature and was signed by the principal chief (who, incidentally, had veto power). By statehood in 1907 Oklahoma had a reasonably developed telephone system for those times, with local and long distance service (and sometimes competition, with the Bell company (then known in Oklahoma as the Pioneer Telephone and Telegraph Company) already becoming the major player. There were also telephone connections with surrounding states and on as far as you could go in those days before repeaters. Note that much of the eastern and southeastern parts of what is now Oklahoma (including Tulsa, mentioned in your comments) were part of what was generally called "Indian Territory," although that was not a legal entity and the jurisdiction was that of the respective Indian tribes. The northern, northwestern and western parts of the state were "Oklahoma Territory," a territory regularly organized like other "territories" of the United States. But toll dialing ... in fact, any kind of dialing ... were almost or completely non-existent in 1907, and there wasn't even a philosophical basis for area codes. As you say, it was too remote to be relevant to today's telecommunications sytem. Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@baremetl.com ------------------------------ From: hrood@xs4all.nl (Hendrik Rood) Subject: Re: Alpha Paging From DTMF Phone Date: Sat, 04 Nov 95 20:45:26 GMT Organization: Hendriks Humble Home Hero In article , bfm@pobox.com (Barry Margolius, NYC) wrote: > I have come across two methods of "touch-toning" alpha messages that I > like better than the one you describe. I've not seen either of them > used in paging, but here they are: > 1. Press the letter key once for the first letter, twice for the > second letter, thrice (I love that word) for the third letter. Your > "call home" example would be: 222 2 555 555 * 44 666 6 33. This > system is, to me, the easiest to use, but is subject to error as the > user must pause between each letter of the alphabet, e.g. to > differentiate AA from B. > 2. Your first keypress indicates which set of three letters, the > second keypress is 1,2, or 3 to indicate which letter. So "call home" > becomes 23 21 53 53 * 42 63 61 32. This is a bit tougher for the > human, but safer since all letters parse as two digit combinations. In the Netherlands we provide telephones for deaf-people that connects to displays with dtmf-decoders. They use a variant of the second system, but then with the * and # as an escape-code. Call home becomes something like #2 2 #5 #5 *# *4 #6 6 *3. This is used by a lot of deaf-people and it is called "teksttelefoon" or "texttelephone" in English. You can also get a Qwerty-keyboard with an DTMF-encoder using this system. There are people who run translation-services for deaf people behind a medium-prized 900 number. Dialling this number deaf people can communicate with speaking people, that do not use the display-gear In practice typing is a bit slow. Most alphanumerics use two dtmf-tones. This then comes to 200 ms pro character. But it is still fast enough to get a serious fast information flow. The problem is: telephones with these encoding use a different configuration in Several European countries. They also differ from the alphanumeric US-system. Hendrik Rood Stratix Consulting Group BV, Schiphol NL tel: +31 20 44 66 555 fax: +31 20 44 66 560 e-mail: Hendrik.Rood@stratix.nl ------------------------------ From: lars@spectrum.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: US Phone Usable in France? Date: 4 Nov 1995 21:44:07 -0800 Organization: Rockwell International - CMC Network Products In article Chester Howes writes: > A customer at my local Radio Shack said he had sent a phone to a friend > in Paris and the then found out the plug (US modular) wouldn't fit the > jack in Paris. He want an adapter to mate the two. Such adapters are readily available in the US. I have seen them in - large computer stores; - some Radio Shack stores; - electronic parts stores; - some "drug and discount" stores. They cost about USD 10.00 per adapter. > I told him I thought the phone systems were not even compatible; a phone > made for the US market would probably not even work on the French phone > system. While the French telephone company (and the French government's Direction de la Reglementation Generale) would like to emphasize the differences and insist that no equipment may be attached unless it has been verified in design reviews and laboratory tests to be officially compatible, the differences are of no practical importance, except for the plug. I have also used French manufactured modems here, and they worked fine, too. Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@RNS.COM Rockwell Network Systems Phone: +1-805-562-3158 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Internets: designed and built while you wait ------------------------------ From: Sheri Subject: Re: Looking For Telephone With Call Blocking Date: 4 Nov 1995 11:56:26 GMT Organization: Network Access Services, Inc. gencom@airmail.net (Stephen Chin) wrote: > Does anyone know of a telephone manufacturer that makes a phone which > can block out numbers by putting in a code? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you referring to the *67 code used > to block Caller-ID? There are a couple of companies which made > adjunct devices to plug in before the phone which do this. When the > phone goes off hook, the little device automatically sends out *67 > at the start of the dialing string. Or did you have something else in > mind? PAT] The FANS-BM100 Blockmaster controls who sees your number/name on caller ID. It detects when you take your phone off-hook and will automatically send a request for blocking signal before you start dialing. You can also unblock any particular call if you're already set up with a permanently blocked number. The FANS-F250A features caller ID with post call preset so that any number can be preset as a preferred or as an unwanted number, red LED to warn of an incoming unwanted call and green LED to indicate an incoming preferred call. B.E.L.-Tronics AD100 has a call reject feature which allows the user to record up to 100 undesirable phone numbers and incoming calls from this list will receive a message stating call will not be accepted. B.E.L.-Tronics CF130 - Telephone also has a call reject feature which allows users to reject undesirable callers with a digital voice message. SNI Bouncer rejects nuisance calls without ringing your phone. I'll keep looking for other products that might fill your need. Sheri Stritof [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sheri, can you give us any ordering information or addresses for these products? PAT] ------------------------------ From: dan@fch.wimsey.bc.ca (Dan Fandrich) Subject: Re: Trying to Get Info From 604-555-1212 British Colombia, No Go Date: Sun, 05 Nov 95 00:06:42 GMT Organization: Fandrich Cone Harvesters Ltd. In article wa2ise@netcom.com writes: > I don't know what town this company is in I explain. "Can't you just > do a search for "Softlanding Software". "No, sorry, that's > impossible", "What do you mean impossible, how many "Softlanding > Software"'s are there in your province?! She says "probably only one, > but I need the city for it". I'd have to search the entire province." Well, it is a big province. ;) I don't have any details about their directory database, but this is a problem to me on occasion as well (it probably comes as no surprise that BC Telecom is majority owned by GTE). It is useful to realize that their system can check cities which are in the same local calling area or nearby the one you ask for. Just say "Vancouver" and you've covered close to half the province, population-wise; if the listing wasn't found, say "Victoria" and you've probably covered 2/3. Since you're not looking for a forestry or mining company, it's almost a sure thing you'll get the listing. Dan dan@fch.wimsey.bc.ca / MIME email ok finger danf@wimsey.com for pgp key ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #465 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 6 09:27:46 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA27486; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 09:27:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 09:27:46 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511061427.JAA27486@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #466 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Nov 95 09:27:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 466 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Selective Answering Machine From the UK (Ole J. Jacobsen) Re: Selective Answering Machine from the UK (Martin D. Kealey) Re: Sharing One Phone Line With Multiple Modems (Mike Morris) Re: Another UK Number Change (Matthew Richardson) Re: ETSI Standards Needed (Sergei Anfilofiev) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Dave Levenson) Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Trouble Recognizing Pound Key With Intervoice (Greg T. Schmidt) Environmental Education on the Web (Anne S. Crump) Web Page For History of the Internet (Kelly Breit) Re: Payphone Networking Directory (borids@aol.com) PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed (Rich Padula) Re: 900 Mhz Headset Wanted (Eric Friedebach) Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople (Ross Oliver) Last Laugh! Go Directly to Wall Street (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Nov 95 02:21:08 PST From: Ole J. Jacobsen Subject: Re: Selective Answering Machine From the UK The cheapest and easiest way around this problem is to purchase a so called Master Socket from a telecom dealer in the UK. (BT will apparently not sell you this since they are the only ones who are allowed to officially install it.). There is only one Master Socket in each house, and everything is slaved off of it. The Master Socket contains the magic capacitor required to make any UK phone ring using the three wire method described by another poster. Make a "tail" of US RJ-11 wire, that is a cord with your normal US plug at one end and open wires at the other. Connect the red and green US RJ-11 wires to pins 2 and 5 in the Master Socket on the input side (you can use a UK punch-down tool made of plastic to do this). Then use the cord with the UK plug that came with your machine to attach the answering machine to the Master socket. The RJ-11 "tail" goes to the US line or PBX, obviously. [==RJ-11-------[MS]{UK--------[UK phone] Be careful of one thing: In the UK you can get two kinds of cords for answering machines. Both have a UK plug at one end and a US plug at the other, but some are wired "straight through" while the other lot have the appropriate cross over to make red/green on the US side match up with pins 2 and 5 on the UK side. If your device has its phone line cord wired in, you won't have to worry about this. Good luck! Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher, ConneXions--The Interoperability Report, Interop Company, a division of SOFTBANK Expos, 303 Vintage Park Drive, Foster City, CA 94404-1138, USA. Ph: +1 (415) 578-6988 Fax: +1 (415) 525-0194. ------------------------------ From: martin@kurahaupo.gen.nz (Martin D Kealey) Subject: Re: Selective Answering Machine From the UK Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 12:02:44 NZST Being here in NZ (probably the only other country in the world that uses BT style wiring) I'm prompted to comment on this article. > The UK telephone system uses a third wire not found on (most) US > telephone systems. The third wire is used to distribute the ringing > signal, separate from the two wires that carry the voice signals. It should be noted that the three-wire signal is only between CPE, not from the exchange. There is simply a shared capacitor decoupling the DC line voltage from all the ringers, rather than each phone set having its own decoupling. The ringers are shorted out during pulse dialing, which effectively stops the bell tinkle. [ One of the benefits of this arrangement is that there is virtually no limit to the number of phone sets that can be attached to a line, since they impose no additional (capacitive) loading; of course, one might run out of current to drive the ringers, but that's the customer's problem. ] > I understand that a UK company makes a device called a "mod-tap" which > makes the necessary conversion between three- and two-wire systems. The signal accross the wire pair from the exchange is the same composite DC + AC ringing; however, it is conceivable that Theodore Hong's PBX could have a separate signal wire all the way from the PBX. However, if it is done this way, I would have expected the results to be reversed if there was to be any distinction. > In TELECOM Digest #460, Theodore Hong wrote: >> I've recently moved from the US to the UK, and I brought my answering >> machine with me. It's hooked up to the local switchboard here, and >> the phone part works fine. I thought the answering machine part did >> too, until I discovered that it didn't answer outside calls, only >> internal ones. Now outside calls do have a different ringing pattern >> (two rings instead of one), but I can't see what would cause the >> answering machine to ignore calls from outside ...? Maybe the "extension" that the fax machine is using is actually a hybrid trunk/extension port, so possibly it's done deliberately for inter-PBX signalling purposes ... or maybe external trunk calls are simply electrically connected to the extension, while internal calls run off the local "battery". I would be tempted to check on the extension concerned for: (a) DC voltage inversion, and (b) AC ringing frequency (16.7 Hz?) (c) AC ringing voltage (d) The adaptor connects the bell-wire from the extension socket to the external "phone" connector on the fax machine (it shouldn't). I had a problem once where the fax machine internally had a bridge rectifier across the line, and miss-wiring of the plug (involving the bell wire) resulted in the fax machine holding the line up IFF the line polarity was different. If voltage inversion is provided for signalling, then each incoming call would appear to be answered (due to the electrical short), while the fax machine would never see the ringing signal, and so not answer either. Martin ------------------------------ From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: Sharing One Phone Line With Multiple Modems Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 07:26:11 GMT jhope@sam.neosoft.com (John S. Hope) writes: > Does anyone know of a company that makes a modem multiplexor. That > is, I need a box that will accept one phone line and be able to switch > between async posts depending on what command strings I issue. > I will be using one phone line to dial into the management functions > of several systems. > Please provide any information you have including product name, model, > company contact, and any experience with the product. An acquantance of mine runs a billing system for trunked radio operators, and installs a Black Box Corp. box and a Hayes compatible modem at each site. The BBC unit apparently has autoanswer and passwords, and allows him to select up to 8 different DB-25 RS-232 units. I do not know what the model number is, but BBC has some pretty sharp people -- call 412-746-5500. I don't thinkthey have an 800 number. Disclaimer: I am not associated with Black Box corp, not even as a satisfied user. Mike Morris morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us #include I have others, but this works the best. This message assembled from 100% recycled electrons (and pixels). ------------------------------ From: matthew@itconsult.co.uk (Matthew Richardson) Subject: Re: Another UK Number Change Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 10:48:49 GMT Organization: I.T. Consultancy Limited, Jersey In article , Rachael@walrus.ftech.co.uk (Rachael Rosen) wrote: > Are you sure about 01734 04xxxx ? How can you have a Reading number > starting with 04 ? What does a local caller dial for this ? Surely > no exchange numbers in UK start with a zero ? It is true that certain Reading numbers have been issued starting with a zero. They can only be dialled by prefixing them with 01734, even from within Reading, although they would then be treated as a local call. Not very good really! Best wishes, Matthew ------------------------------ From: Sergei Anfilofiev Subject: Re: ETSI Standards Needed Date: 6 Nov 1995 10:22:16 +0300 Organization: ZNIIS Reply-To: sanfi@zniis.msk.su pboric@ctc-mundo.net writes: > I need to get several standards from ETSI, specially those related > with EURO ISDN If somebody knows where I can get them, please let me > know. The best idea is to contact ETSI Publications Office: tel: +33.92.94.42.00 fax: +33.93.95.81.33 or use helpdesk@etsi.fr telnet.etsi.fr ftp.etsi.fr www.etsi.fr Hope this helps. Dr. Sergei Anfilofiev | Tel:(+7 095)368-9127 Chief of International | Fax:(+7 095)274-0067 Relations Department | E-mail: sanfi@zniis.msk.su ZNIIS, Moscow, Russia | ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 13:13:41 GMT John Shaver (steep-mo-m@huachuca-emh2.army.mil) writes: > Justice at last!!! and quotes from a Bell Atlantic press release: > Subject: Wireless Customers Can Save With Calling Party Pays Can anybody fill in a few details on this? In particular, if the caller is using a payphone, somebody else's phone, or a hotel room phone, how does Bell Atlantic handle the billing? Is the caller given the option of billing the call to a calling card or to his own telephone service? Does the AIN properly screen these calls to prevent billing to agregators, employers, etc? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 23:40:27 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn If you don't think the 'long arm of the law' in the United States can't reach outside the USA when politically charged cases are involved, perhaps you should think again. In what is being hailed as a 'first ever', federal prosecutors have announced the conviction of a BBS system administrator and his wife *in Mexico* on charges of transmitting child pornography into the USA. Robert A. Copella, former vice-president at Rand McNally Corporation was sentenced in federal court in Newark, NJ last Friday to five and a half years in prison. Pamela J. Kneeland was sentenced to 18 months. Copella and Kneeland met for the first time in Chicago in April, 1993. He was 49, the father of three children and an expert in security devices for airline tickets and baggage, in addition to being a VP at Rand McNally. She was 24, a prostitute addicted to crack cocaine, and had been arrested 35 times in the previous year alone for soliciting for prostitution. After they began living togther, the government alleges they devised a scheme to distribute child pornography on a computer bulletin board system attached to a telephone line billed to Copella at his home in Northbrook, Illinois. The United States Customs Service began tracking Copella when a customs agent in Florida (at the big child porn distribution facility Customs operates there) learned about the Illinois operation being planned in 1993. Copella had responded to 'Confused Teen' and a couple other screen names Customs uses on America OnLine to entrap users. Realizing it would be sheer folly to set up a child porn distribution system here, Copella and Kneeland moved to Mexico early in 1994. There they began their distribution via an ISP in the United States using the long-distance telephone to call into the USA, download their material, etc. During a raid on their home *in Mexico* by Customs agents earlier this year, Copella and his lovely wife were arrested and charged with transmitting child pornography into the USA from another country, and brought to the USA for trial. I honestly did not think federal agents in this country could go to another country and charge residents of that country with violations of laws in this country. What they got them on was (although being elsewhere, outside the USA) sending child porn *into* the USA. I thought federal agents could only deal with what people here in this country did, for example, being in possession of it, or transmitting it around internally. I guess I was wrong. Even the US Attorney's office however agrees this is a 'first'. Poor Pamela ... whatever she learned about the legal system and justice in the USA after 35 visits to the women's lockup and Prostitute's Court in Chicago in 1992-93 alone, I doubt she was quite prepared for this, her first bigtime bust. Copella essntially said it was his thing and to leave her out of it, but the court disagreed, and sentenced her as well. Going from little or no knowlege at all of computers to helping operate a child pornography site on the net; quite an intro- duction to computers and the Internet, don't you think? PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 95 10:26:43 GMT From: Greg T. Schmidt Subject: Re: Trouble Recognizing Pound Key With Intervoice > I have run into this with electronic Northern Telecom Meridian sets. > You hit the # key to activate out-bound DTMF signalling after dialing. > This must be configurable because it doesn't happen on all Meridian > sets. Perhaps the switch configuration doesn't have enough DTMF > generators. The problem may also be related to a feature in Northern Telecom PBX's called End-to-End-Signalling. It needs to be set to yes in the configuration. (Specifically, Load 15, EEST in the Customer Data Block) Unfortunately, many techs that set up Northern's fail to do this. This will eliminate some '#' trouble with IVR's and voicemail with Northern's. Greg Schmidt gschmidt-c@rtc.gov (816) 968-7153 ------------------------------ Date: 06 Nov 95 05:04:19 EST From: Anne S. Crump <102626.2570@compuserve.com> Subject: Environmental Education on the Web Dear Mr. Townson: I gathered through your association with "Internet World" that you are interested in following new publications and services on the Web. You may also be interested in letting readers know about our new Web service. Our new electronic magazine on the Web is entitled "Science & the Environment." This "zine" is an educational news summary service that gives educators and students the latest news gathered from over 500 sources (many of which are unavailable to school libraries). The original articles are condensed, rewritten and enhanced by colorful photographs and graphics. Teachers are encouraged to select, photocopy and distribute articles from the eight chapters that comprise each bi-monthly edition. These articles then act as an up-to-date supplement for text books being used in environmental and science lessons. Pay us a visit the next time you are on the Web. Our address is: http://www.voyagepub.com/publish We think that you will find us quite compelling. I would also welcome any questions or comments you may have. Thanks! Sincerely, Anne S. Crump Managing Editor Voyage Publishing, Inc. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, my only 'association' with {Internet World} was that they ran a feature article about me and this Digest in their September, 1994 issue. I do think your Web page sounds interesting and worthwhile, and I am happy to let others know about it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Nov 1995 16:55:04 -0600 From: kelly.breit@netalliance.net (Kelly Breit) Subject: Web Page For History of the Internet Passed along FYI to the Digest: Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 09:30:19 -0500 From: Russell Kahn To: Multiple recipients of list BESTWEB Subject: Re: history of the Internet A nice compilation of the history of the Internet, complete with a chronological discussion and graphs showing growth of the Internet can be found at http://info.isoc.org/guest/zakon/Internet/History/HIT.html It goes through 1995. It includes links to other resources. Russ Kahn Instructor, Technical Communications State University of New York, Institute of Technlogy P.O. Box 3050 Utica, NY 13504 Home Page: http://www.arsc.sunyit.edu/~com400/Kahn.html ------------------------------ From: borids@aol.com Subject: Re: Payphone Networking Directory Date: 2 Nov 1995 12:12:48 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: borids@aol.com Your best bet is to contact APCC (American Public Communications Council). Ask them for a listing of state payphone associations ... wealth of information. Tel 703-385-5300 If you are interested in the Billing and Collections side of the telecom industry you can contact myself [Boris Gutierrez 818-794-1810]. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 12:41:33 GMT From: Rpadula@aol.com Subject: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed I've just received a package from BellSouth offering me Call Waiting Deluxe in conjunction with Caller ID. The gag is that you can get the name and number of the person on the other side of the call waiting beep. I presume this is using the ADSI signalling method, and they are offering to sell the display telephone, a PowerTouch 350, with the service for about $150. Does anybody have recommendations on this telephone? I understand that Northern Telecom (or Nortel or whatever it is they are calling themselves nowadays) makes a PowerTouch 350 phone; I wonder if this is the same unit, only with the BellSouth logo on the front. I would appreciate any comments, good or bad, about the phone and/or service. Thanks much, Rich Padula ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 17:19:48 -0800 From: aerostar@ccia.com Subject: Re: 900 Mhz Headset Wanted Holling@intech-group.com (Ernie Holling) wrote: > We're looking for a 900Mhz headset which has all the electronics in > a holster with a light weight headset attached. An extensive catalog I received from a company called Phone Central offers two cordless headsets, but not *exactly* what you are looking for: Inovonics 900 MHz Cordless Headset, INO-HEADSET, $388.27. This is a self contained unit; nothing to clip to your belt. Plantronics Handsfree Cordless, PLA-CT460, $218.60. This offers you the choice of two headsets; one that you slip into your ear or a headband- style headset. The actual remote has a belt clip. But this is a 46/49 MHz unit. You can contact Phone Central at 800-437-2160/708-299-3500. Eric Friedebach ------------------------------ From: reo@netcom.com (Ross Oliver) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople Organization: The Air Affair: http://www.airaffair.com/ Date: Sun, 6 Nov 1995 23:16:29 GMT I am so sick of phone solicitation that I don't even bother to be polite anymore. I made the mistake of donating to one of some "law enforcement takes the kids to the circus" drive a while ago, and now I must be on some "phone suckers" list because I have been barraged by similar solicitations ever since, usually Saturday mornings at 7:30am :-( Mostly I just hang up on them, but if I'm in a playful mood: Me: Hello? Voice: Hello, I'm calling from the San Jose Mercury News. [they call about once a month] Me: Oh yes, hold on just a moment. They usually last about a minute, although the longest has hung on for five minutes. This works best if you have a phone that you can put on hold that will automatically go back on-hook when they get a clue and hang up. Ross Oliver reo@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 22:43:06 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Subject: Last Laugh! Go Directly to Wall Street; Do Not Pass Go Anthony Sarivola, 40, of Allenwood, PA is a smart man. Using just his telephone he sold stocks in fake companies and earned more than one million dollars -- or should I say scammed more than one million dollars -- in the process. He incorporated the fake companies using fake names and fake addresses so that he could sell the fake stock. A couple weeks ago, Sarivola was arrested at his residence by Postal Inspectors and FBI agents, and charged with multiple counts of financial fraud. What makes this unusual is that his 'residence' in Allenwood is at the United States Peniteniary there. Already incarcerated on several convictions for fraud, Sarivola now faces trial on several additional charges. His entire 'office' consisted of a prisoner phone. Sarivola went about it all wrong. You are supposed to start out on Wall Street or at the Chicago Board of Trade and *then* wind up going to prison, not the other way around. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #466 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 6 16:50:24 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA26525; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 16:50:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 16:50:24 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511062150.QAA26525@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #467 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Nov 95 16:50:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 467 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CFP: 4th Intl Conf on Spoken Language Processing (Jim Polikoff) New NYNEX "Unlimited Usage" Rates (Bill Rubin) Limits to Redialing? (Bren Smith) Book Review: "The Mosaic Handbook for Microsoft Windows" (Rob Slade) All Circuits Busy (cccef.bgriffis@capital.ge.com) RAS Enterprise Ready? (Daryl Morey) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: polikoff@castle.asel.udel.edu (Jim Polikoff) Subject: CFP: 4th Intl Conf on Spoken Language Processing Date: 6 Nov 1995 15:05:46 -0500 Organization: AI duPont Institute Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing ****** October 3-6, 1996 Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel Philadelphia, PA, USA ****** ________________________ ICSLP 96 Organizers____________________________ H. Timothy Bunnell, Chair Richard A. Foulds, Vice-Chair Applied Science & Engineering Laboratories Wilmington, DE, USA ______________________________ICSLP______________________________________ ICSLP unites researchers, developers, and clinicians for an exchange on a wide variety of topics related to spoken language processing by humans and machines. Conference presentations range from basic acoustic phonetic research to clinically oriented speech training devices to speech-based natural language interfaces for man-machine interaction. ICSLP 96 will feature technical sessions in both oral and poster format, plenary talks, commercial exhibits, and daily special sessions. In addition, satellite workshops will be held in conjunction with the conference in the areas of interactive voice technology, spoken dialogue, speech databases and speech I/O, and the integration of gestures and speech. A new emphasis for ICSLP 96 will be on the clinical applications of speech technology, including the use of speech technology based applications for persons with disabilities. _________________________Conference Update________________________10/4/95 Dates to Note: January 15, 1996 - Paper abstracts due for review March 15, 1996 - Acceptance notification May 1, 1996 - Deadline for papers (camera-ready, 4 pages) Prospective authors are invited to submit papers relevant to spoken language processing in any of the conference Technical Areas. Abstracts of proposed papers must be received by the ICSLP 96 Organizing Committee no later than January 15, 1996. Only original, unpublished papers may be submitted. Papers will be selected by the ICSLP 96 Technical Program Committee and assigned for presentation in poster or oral format. English is the working language for the conference. Submission of an abstract implies a commit ment to submit a four page, camera-ready version of the paper and to present the paper in either an oral or poster for mat if the abstract is accepted. Participants will be expected to pay their own registration fees, travel, and accommodations for ICSLP 96. _____________________Submission of Abstracts____________________________ Abstracts must be received by the ICSLP 96 Organizing Committee no later than January 15, 1996. Abstracts may be submitted either by post or by e-mail following these guidelines: + One page, 400 word maximum + Technical Area(s) indicated in order of preference using the codes (A - X) below. + Title of the proposed paper clearly indicated + Preference for paper or poster clearly indicated + If sent by post, submit four (4) copies of the abstract + If sent by e-mail, use plain text (ASCII) format only Each abstract must also include the following contact information: + Author name(s)* + Postal mailing address + Phone number + Fax number + E-mail address E-mailed abstracts will be acknowledged by e-mail within 48 hours of submission. If you do not receive e-mail confirmation, we have not received your abstract! Please check the e-mail address and resubmit. Please do not e-mail multiple copies for any other reason. *Please be sure that the primary contact person is noted if it is someone other than the First Author. Mail or send abstracts to: ICSLP 96 Applied Science & Engineering Laboratories A.I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE 19899 E-mail: ICSLP-abstract@asel.udel.edu ________________________Technical Areas___________________________________ A. Production of spoken language B. Perception of spoken language C. Robust speech modeling and speech enhancement D. Speech coding and transmission E. Automatic speech recognition F. Spoken language processing for special populations G. Phonetics and phonology H. Spoken discourse analysis/synthesis I. Synthesis of spoken language J. Applications for people with speech/language/hearing disorders K. Databases and standards for speech technology L. Prosody of spoken language M. Speech analysis and parameterization N. Spoken language acquisition/learning O. Integration of spoken language and natural language processing P. Hardware for speech processing Q. Neural networks and stochastic modeling of spoken language R. Dialects and speaking styles S. Instructional technology for spoken language T. Speaker/language identification and verification U. Human factors and assessment in spoken language applications V. Spoken language dialogue and conversation W. Gesture and Multimodal Spoken Language Processing X. Other _____________________Registration Information______________________________ Full registration includes: Admission to technical sessions, Reception, Banquet, Proceedings (printed & CD-ROM) Limited registration includes: Admission to technical sessions, Reception, Proceedings on CD-ROM Early Registration fees: Member* Non-Member Student Full $425 $525 $250 Limited $300 $400 $150 Late registration: After June 21, add $60 After August 9, add $100 Additional Tickets: Banquet $60 Reception $50 Additional Proceedings: Printed $125 CD-ROM $15 * See Sponsoring and Cooperating Organizations. ________________________Satellite Workshops________________________________ The following Satellite Workshops will be held immediately before or after the ICSLP 96 conference. 1. IVITA The 3rd IEEE workshop on Interactive Voice Technology for Telecommunications Applications (IVTTA) will be held at the AT&T Learning Center, Basking Ridge, New Jersey, from September 30 - October 1, 1996. The IVTTA workshop brings together applications researchers planning to conduct or who have recently conducted field trials of new applications of speech technologies. Due to workshop facility constraints, attendance will be limited primarily to contributors. For further information about the workshop, contact: Dr. Murray Spiegel Bellcore 445 South Street Morristown, NJ, USA e-mail: spiegel@bellcore.com Phone: 1-201-829-4519; Fax: 1-201-829-5963 Submit abstracts (400 words, maximum 1 page) before March 15, 1996 to: Dr. David Roe IEEE IVTTA `96 AT&T Bell Laboratories, Room 2D-533 Murray Hill, NJ 07974 e-mail: roe@hogpb.att.com Phone: 908 582-2548; Fax: 908 582-3306 2. ISSD-96 The 1996 International Symposium on Spoken Dialogue (ISSD-96) will be held on October 2 and 3 at the venue of ICSLP 96. It is intended to be a forum of interdisciplinary exchange between researchers working on spoken dialogues from various points of view. The first day is devoted to invited lectures followed by sessions of both invited and contributed papers, which will be continued on the second day as special sessions of ICSLP 96. Papers submitted to ICSLP 96 (Technical Areas H,L,O,U,&V) may be selected for presentation at the symposium. For further information about the symposium, contact: Prof. Hiroya Fujisaki, Chairman, ISSD-96 Dept. of Applied Electronics Science University of Tokyo 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, 278 Japan e-mail: fujisaki@te.noda.sut.ad.jp Phone: +81-471-23-4327; Fax: +81-471-22-9195 3. COCOSDA Workshop 96 COCOSDA Workshop 96 will be held on Monday, October 7 at the Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel. The International Coordinating Committee on Speech Databases and Speech I/O Systems Assessment (COCOSDA) has been established to promote international cooperation in the fundamental areas of Spoken Language Engineering. Previous meetings have taken place in Banff 1992, Berlin 1993, Yokohama 1994 and Madrid 1995. Program and registration information for COCOSDA 96 will be forthcoming in later announcements. For more information about COCOSDA, consult the Web Page at http://www.itl.atr.co.jp/cocosda. 4. WIGLS Workshop on the Integration of Gesture in Language and Speech (WIGLS) will be held October 7 and 8. This Workshop will consider the integration of gesture and spoken language in intelligent human/computer interfaces, advanced assistive technology for individuals with disabilities, telemanipulation and robotics systems, and human conversation. Gestures including hand postures, dynamic arm movements, facial expression, and eye gaze will be considered along with more traditional lip shapes and handwriting movements. For further information, contact: Dr. Lynn Messing A. I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE 19899 e-mail: messing@asel.udel.edu Phone: +1 302 651 6830; Fax: +1-302-651-6895 ______________Sponsoring and Cooperating Organizations________________________ The Acoustical Society of America The Acoustical Society of Japan American Speech and Hearing Association (Pending) Australian Speech Science and Technology Association European Speech Communication Association IEEE Signal Processing Society Incorporated Canadian Acoustical Association International Phonetic Association For additional sponsoring organizations, contact ICSLP 96. ______________For more information about ICSLP 96, contact_____________________ ICSLP 96 Applied Science & Engineering Laboratories A.I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE 19899 Phone: +1 302 651 6830 TDD: +1 302 651 6834 Fax: +1 302 651 6895 Email: ICSLP96@asel.udel.edu WWW: http://www.asel.udel.edu/speech/icslp.html FTP: zeppo.asel.udel.edu:pub/ICSLP A two-page PostScript format copy of the most recent Conference Announcement and Call for Papers can also be obtained by anonyomus ftp. Connect to host zeppo.asel.udel.edu, cd to directory pub/ICSLP96, and get call.ps.Z in binary mode. The file must be uncompressed with a unix compatable uncompress program before being printed. This plain text version of the announcement is located in the same directory as file call.txt _______________________International Advisory Board__________________________ Hiroya Fujisaki - Founding Chair Science University of Tokyo Tokyo, Japan Jens Blauert Louis C. W. Pols Ruhr-Universitat Bochum University of Amsterdam, Bochum, Germany Amsterdam, The Netherlands Anne Cutler Lawrence Rabiner Max Planck Institute for AT&T Bell Labs Psycholinguistics Murray Hill, NJ, USA Nijmegen, The Netherlands Gunnar Fant Katsuhiko Shirai Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) Waseda University Stockholm, Sweden Tokyo, Japan John Laver Kenneth Stevens Humanities Research Board of Massachusetts Institute the British Academy of Technology Edinburgh, Scotland Cambridge, MA, USA Joseph Mariani Yoh'ichi Tohkura LIMSI-CNRS ATR Human Information Orsay, France Processing Research Lab Kyoto, Japan J. Bruce Millar Victor Zue Australian National University Massachusetts Institute Canberra, Australia of Technology Cambridge, MA, USA John Ohala University of California Berkeley, CA, USA ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 95 15:29:50 EST From: Bill Rubin Subject: New NYNEX "Unlimited Usage" Rates NYNEX recently announced new packages for those of us in the NYC LATA to allow you to make an unlimited number of calls in the LATA (NYC, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, Rockland, Putnam) except your local calling area (ie that area whose calls are presently untimed, if you're in NYC, then it is all five boroughs). You can also include your local calling area for an additional fee, thereby basically giving you the entire LATA for a flat monthly rate. I called, they want $22.12 for me, which is apparently based on the average of my calls outside my local area (northern Westchester) from July 1994 thru June 1995, and then they added 8% for some reason that I could not understand (they originally told me they had SUBTRACTED 10%). For an extra $16 a month ($38.20 total) I can get northern Westchester as well, and basically all of my non-toll calls would be included for a set monthly fee. The plan does have its merits. If you're like me, and avoid making out of area calls until after 9pm, or 11pm, then with this plan you can call whenever you want and not worry about the time of the day, and moving the calls to the non (or less) discounted times might make it worthwhile. I could also choose just the $22 plan, and I could probably move several of my local area calls to other areas because they are online services, so I could call the Prodigy number in White Plains instead of the local Yorktown number and it would be free. It would be good for those of us in northern Westchester because most online providers tend to forget that all of Westchester is not a single calling area, and for us to call lower Westchester (ie White Plains) is a timed call, making an online service without a local number very expensive to use for extended periods. The plan could also be great news for people who still have two phone lines, one normal and one flat rate, since this gives you flat rate everywhere. On the other hand, I checked my most recent phone bills (past June) and they seem to be lower than the rates I had earlier in the year (they gave me the numbers they based the rate on and the regional usage ranges from $13.24 to 28.55 a month). Also, it is not clear how this rate would change in the future. The first time I called, I was told it would stay the same "forever". I don't really believe that. If you're in the NYC LATA, and want to find out what your plan would cost, call NYNEX at 1-800-682-8555. I think the extention you want is 103 (or is it 203)? Just ask for the unlimited calling plans. They also have a deal where you can buy a block of time and pay six cents a minute for the first hour, five cents after that. That is apparently geared towards people who make large numbers of short calls, and presumably not at off-peak times. I'd be curious to know how many people choose to sign up for this plan and how good a deal it really sounds like. Bill rubin@watson.ibm.com ------------------------------ Date: 6 Nov 1995 10:46:28 -0800 From: Bren Smith Subject: Limits to Redialing? I vaguely remember a product called a Demon Dialer on the market about ten years ago, that allowed you to redial busy numbers at some phenomenal rate per minute. It then seemed to disappear from the market. Is it true that the Demon Dialer disappeared because of LEC's limitations on the number of times you can redial within a certain time period? Bren Smith |510/253-3048 voice Dantz Development |510/253-9099 fax 4 Orinda Way, Bldg C |bren@dantz.com Orinda, CA 94563 |"Practice safe government - use kingdoms" [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you are referring to how often modems can redial a number automatically (over any period of time) before they have to be reset and the process restarted. I do not believe there were any USA regulations on this, but there are (were) in Canada (limited to ten redial attempts before resetting) and since all the modem manufacturers in the USA wish to sell their products in Canada also, they complied with that ruling. The manuals for a couple of my older modems discuss that regulation. That is not, in my opinion, why the Demon Dialer is rarely seen any longer. Those things, like so many adjuncts to the phone years ago were intended to provide useful 'custom calling' features to the large number of people to whom such things were otherwise unavailable. There were conferencing units, speed dial units -- including one of the best I saw which was a touch tone pad you installed in the phone in place of the existing one with the elec- tronics built right into the pad -- and similar. Like pocket tone dialers, which had their heyday when a lot of services used touch tones and yet many phone exchanges were not equipped for touch tone, as the telcos modernized their central offices, many of the features we used adjunct equipment for in the past became available from telco. No dummies, the people at telco, they saw an increasing number of users in the 1970's using 'call extenders' to route calls to other numbers, so they gave us call forwarding. They saw people purchasing external speed dial devices (or getting phones with the same built in) and they gave us speed dialing. Speed dial appears to be one of the custom calling services that never did catch on, as most people still seem to prefer loading it into their phone rather than subscribing to telco's central office version. With busy redial however, especially since most telcos have dropped the monthly subscription fee and allow its use on a casual basis for a few cents each time used, it would seem more people like it that way instead of the external devices such as Demon Dialer which were prone to errors anyway, sometimes not catching the busy signal fast enough, etc. I think the Demon Dialer is still being made, and I think it comes from the people who made (make?) the Zoom modems. I have an old Demon Dialer setting around here someplace I got about ten or fifteen years ago. I never use it now and can't even find the power supply for it. Another good example was the 'Privecode' device from International Mobile Machines in Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania. It was the forerunner to 'call screening' which is now offered by most telcos. It sat on the line and grabbed incoming calls before your phone could ring even one time. Its synthesized voice would demand of the caller, 'enter your privecode number please', and if the caller did not enter the correct combination of digits, he was rudely disconnected. The device stored ten different user defined numbers which would cause the incoming call to always go to an answering machine or cause various ringing cadences to alert the subscriber to *who* might be calling based on the digits the person had keyed in. Then came Caller-ID and Call Screening from telco, and that was the end of the Privecode people. Someone still might be making the device; I have not seen one in years, and yes, I had one; it would have been about 1979-80. Generally, the telcos have taken every popular adjunct feature from ten to twenty years ago and turned it into a central office feature, putting many of the small telephone peripheral device manufacturers out of business in the same way answering machines (and specifically Phone Mate back in the late 1970's) put the live answering services out of business and now voicemail -- in your friendly telco's central office -- has severely dented the answering machine business. What is the one adjunct which is moving *out* of the central office and into the customer's hands? Pay-per-use or coin phone service. We are seeing more and more COCOTS with the programming in the phone itself rather than the phone exchange. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 12:40:48 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Mosaic Handbook for Microsoft Windows" BKMOSAHW.RVW 951011 "The Mosaic Handbook for Microsoft Windows", Dougherty/Koman, 1994, 1-56592- 094-5 %A Dale Dougherty dale@ora.com %A Richard Koman rkoman@ora.com %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1994 %G 1-56592-094-5 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O 800-998-9938, fax: 707-829-0104, nuts@ora.com, brian@ora.com %O rick.brown@onlinesys.com mary@ora.com %P 262 %T "The Mosaic Handbook for Microsoft Windows" Less general, and more specific to the MS-Windows product than the companion volume for X, this work still provides one of the better overviews of Mosaic. The first four chapters are general explorations of the Internet, World Wide Web (WWW or W3), and the Global Network Navigator (GNN). Chapters five to seven give a great deal more detail than previous Internet guides on customization of Mosaic, multimedia extensions, and HTML (HyperText Markup Language). A final chapter looks at possible future directions, contacts, and resources. Appendices give reference guides to Mosaic and HTML. SLIP, unfortuantely, is only mentioned in the glossary. A great deal of the material here is simple, but some of it is quite important for the operation of Mosaic as a realistic tool. Performance considerations are touched on in a number of places, and the ability to "delay" (more accurately, "suspend") image file loading will likely be the single most widely used "customization" for veteran browsers. The discussion of the use (and limitations) of Mosaic for accessing gopher, WAIS, ftp, telnet, and news resources is also helpful for deciding when to do a quick job "through" Mosaic, or when to shut down and use the real tools. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1995 BKMOSAHW.RVW 951011. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. ROBERTS@decus.ca, rslade@cln.etc.bc.ca, rslade@freenet.vancouver.bc.ca "Information Superhighway" anagram - "When forming, utopia's hairy." Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94311-0/3-540-94311-0 ------------------------------ From: cccef.bgriffis@capital.ge.com Subject: All Circuits Busy Date: Mon, 06 Nov 95 11:16:34 PDT Organization: GE Capital News Server Follow Telecommers: I have been receiving a SIT tone and a message stating: "We're sorry, all circuits are busy. Please try your call later." when placing on-net calls to an office connected via T1 and mapped to our network. This does not happen all the time, but happens randomly. I tried calling the office before it opened -- no one was in, so my call should get through to voice mail. I got the "We're sorry" message. I tried again, and the call went through. I know I am not undertrunked in my office (no fast busies, I also get the same results when calling from ifferent offices). I know the remote office is not undertrunked (1 T1 w/12 both-way DIDs and 12 CO-BWT's for local calling, 1 T1 with 22 channels four-wire E&M, DTMF Wink signalling and two channels for Frame Relay). The LD carrier claims it is a PBX problem. The PBX vendor states that if it was a PBX problem I would get a fast busy, not an all circuits busy. How do I determine where the problem is? ------------------------------ From: dmorey@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Daryl Morey) Subject: RAS Enterprise Ready? Date: 6 Nov 95 15:19:29 GMT Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, US I am evaluating Remote Access products for my companies planned move to remote node access in the next year. Currently we use remote control in a Cubix Communication server with US Robotics Total Control and pcAnywhere. I would appreciate opinions and experiences with RAS regarding whether the members of this group believe it is ready to be an enterprise solution. Our plan is to move to PPP remote access with dynamically assigned IP addresses. We would also like there to be security hooks to ideally a two level authentication process, like Security Dynamics SecurID card. What kind of security does RAS support? (CHAP, SecurID) Is this thing ready for the enterprise and how do you feel about Microsoft's vision for this product? If RAS is not the answer what would you recommend? Anyone who would like to get my experiences with US Robotics Total Control, Cubix Communication Servers, Novell's Netware Connect. SecurID and pcAnywhere can write me and I will be happy to give you advice based on my experiences. I have about two years invested in most of these products so I have been there. Thank you for your time, Daryl Morey ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #467 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 6 18:23:56 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id SAA03228; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 18:23:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 18:23:56 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511062323.SAA03228@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #468 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Nov 95 18:23:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 468 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Killer Application Myth (Mike Murdock) PRI/BRI Seminar Series, Southern California (Cherie Shore) Equal Access and Universities (Samuel Weiler) Bell Canada Centrex (Patrick A. Morin) Ascend Multiband Plus PDD Delay (Djung Nguyen) Need Signalling Document (Henry Stewart) ISC Securelink and ISDN Voice Phones (Joe Plescia) AT&T Mail Security Weaknesses (Greg Maydan) Re: US Phone Usable in France? (James Johnson) Re: US Phone Usable in France? (Lionel Ancelet) Re: Trying to Get Info From 604-555-1212 British Colombia (Jim Cobban) Re: Split-T or Fractional T-1 Device (John W. Pan) Re: Story From PacBell Very Doubtful (Bill Fenner) Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? (Evan Ross) Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? (Jim Cobban) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (John Dupont) When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? (Mark S. Brader) Voice Mail Policy (ring001@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu) Re: 888 Code Startup Not Delayed (Sid Arora) Re: Research Sources Wanted on Telecom Companies (Robert Virzi) Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (Konrad Weigl) Re: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager (Bill Fenner) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Murdock Subject: The Killer Application Myth Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 18:00:00 EST The Killer Application Myth With the continuing increase in competition in all telephony markets the basic transport of a telephone call has become a commodity. Major players in the long distance market are down to shaving pennies to differentiate their rates. As a result, most of the marketing campaigns are now focusing on intangible service aspects such as quality, customer service, future technology, and customer loyalty. The local loop has traditionally been a protected monopoly. As the prices of cellular services decline, and with the impending introduction of "micro-cellular" PCS services and other alternate service providers, competition for local dial tone will inevitably heat up. This increase in competition at all levels is forcing Service Providers to look for other means to distinguish their services from the competition. Most turn to providing "Enhanced Services" such as Voice Mail, Voice Dialing, and Single Number Service in order to generate additional revenue and customer loyalty. Most of these Enhanced Services require the provider to make a significant investment in an integrated Enhanced Services Platform upon which multiple services can easily be trialed and deployed. In order to justify the cost of these platforms the providers are searching for the "Killer Application". That is, the single application which will generate so much additional usage that it will offset the cost of installing the Enhanced Services Platform. The Killer Application is a myth. Many Service Providers, in trials, have deployed numerous enhanced services and received nothing more than a modest response from users. These services include Voice Activated Dialing, Pager Notification, Single Number Service, Short Message Service, and others. Customers have shied away from these offerings for several reasons. Most find the services difficult to use, particularly when DTMF input is required. In order to make the Enhanced Service appeal to the broadest market, many of these services have been endowed with seemingly endless features, options, and menus. This not only makes the service confusing but leaves the customer with the feeling that they are paying for too many features they do not use. The major reason, however, for the lack luster response to these services is basic human nature. People are intrinsically resistant to change, and in particular, resistant to any service which requires they change their behavior significantly. Each of us use telephony services in a different manner, and have unique telephony requirements. Before these enhanced services will be widely accepted they must resolve the above stated impediments. This means providing the user with the ability to customize the service to their specific requirements, using a natural human interface, your voice. The "Killer Application" is individual choice with a natural voice interface. For one individual the "killer application" may be voice mail with pager notification, for another it might be a Single Number Service with Fax Store and Forward, and for another Voice Activated Dialing with Call Screening. At any point the customer may decide they need to add Conference Calling to their feature set. If the customer is required to call a service representative to order this additional feature it is unlikely they will ever take this step. If, however, the customer can simply speak "Add Feature" and "Conference" and the Enhanced Service Platform automatically adds this feature to the customers current feature list, it is more likely that the service will be ordered and used. This is the concept of "Mass Customization" detailed by Alvin Toffler in his book The Third Wave. The ability for the consumer to easily customize their service to meet their individual telecommunications needs. This requires that the service provider have both a broad range of features and a natural human interface which is consistent throughout each of those features. Service Providers can no longer afford to look at each feature as an individual application. They must provide a broad range of features which when implemented are integrated with the existing features the customer is using. That is, the individual applications are simply features of a much larger service, which a customer can easily tailor to their specific needs at any time and as frequently as required. The ability for the individual services to be automatically integrated with the customers existing services is crucial to reducing the complexity of the service. For instance when a customer sets up a personal dialing directory for their Voice Activated Dialing service, and later adds Conference Calling, the new service should use the existing dialing directory. This would permit the customer to set up a conference call by speaking the name of the conferencees as they would if they were dialing them individually. Additionally, the services should always use a common human interface. Switching between Voice and DTMF input, or even between a female and male voice for different features is both confusing and frustrating. Customers have a natural distaste for dealing with computer voice systems. Much consideration should be placed in the "scripting" to ensure that the conversation is as natural as possible. Customers don't want a computer to annoy them with phrases like "Invalid option selection, please try again". Its not natural. They would much prefer a system which responded "Pardon me, I didn't understand what you said". The DTMF pad is a poor interface. Not only is the DTMF pad difficult to use (especially with a cellular phone while driving), but more importantly it is not a natural interface. Voice commands are. The improvements in recent years in voice recognition technology are sufficient to provide a much more interactive voice interface. Customers are willing to "suspend disbelief" and overlook their aversion to dealing with computer systems when the system has a more natural "conversation" with them. In order for customers to generate the additional revenues which providers are searching for, the services offered must provide value, and not simply features. Value is derived from the services ability to simplify a customers communications needs while providing enhanced services. The mythical killer application is not an application at all but a variety of features providing individual choice and flexibility, a natural easy to use human interface, and seamless integrated capabilities. Existing enhanced service applications will continue to find limited success until the user can build there own "killer application". Author: Mike Murdock, (mmurdock@digital.net) Director of Business Development Precision Systems, Inc. A leading provider of interactive 11800 30th Court N. enhanced services systems and software St. Petersburg, Fl. 33716 to the telecommunications market. Phone: 1-813-572-9300 (c) Copyright 1995 Precision Systems Inc. ------------------------------ From: cashore@PacBell.COM (Cherie Shore) Subject: PRI/BRI Seminar Series, Southern California Date: 6 Nov 1995 21:44:39 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Pacific Bell, in conjunction with Northern Telecom, is pleased to present the following seminar series. These seminars will put an emphasis on Primary Rate ISDN in a PBX environment, but will also include an overview of Basic Rate ISDN in a variety of applications. These seminars will be combined with a mini-trade-show, with participation by some of the most popular vendors of ISDN equipment, demonstrating applications of videoconferencing, remote LAN and Internet access, including: Ascend Intel Network Express Motorola ISDN Systems Corp 3COM Picturetel CLI The seminars will be held on the following dates and locations: Dec 5, in Anaheim, at 200 N. Harbor Place, from 1:30 to 4:30 Dec 7, in San Diego, at 525 B St, 17th floor, from 1:30 to 4:30 Dec 12, in LA , at 1010 Wilshire Blvd. , from 1:30 to 4:30 To reserve seats please call 800-655-ISDN. Cherie Shore cashore@pacbell.com ISDN Technology Manager, PacBell ------------------------------ From: weiler@condor.sccs.swarthmore.edu (Samuel Weiler) Subject: Equal Access and Universities Date: 6 Nov 1995 21:02:34 GMT Organization: Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA, USA I've been told that universities providing telephone service in dormitory rooms are no longer considered "aggregators" as described in the equal access order. Is there any validity to that claim? Do the posting requirements (name and address of OSP, address of FCC Common Carrier Bureau Enforcement division) still apply? Secondly, with regard to rate information, must an OSP provide rate information over the phone 24 hours a day? The billing service used by Swarthmore only provides rates only via paper mail, and only have humans answering phones during business hours. The equal access order is at: ftp://ftp.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/legal-fcc/equal.access.rules Samuel Weiler ------------------------------ From: Patrick_Morin@QBC.Clic.Net (Patrick A. Morin) Subject: Bell Canada Centrex Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 16:44:00 GMT Organization: ClicNet Telecommunications I just heard that Bell Canada is refusing to sell Centrex lines to Internet Service Providers, at least in the province of Quebec. Just wondering if this is legal? Fun thing to notice, Bell is entering the ISP game, selling Internet services to end users, not just providers like with Worldlinx. Patrick ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 95 15:41 EST From: Djung Nguyen <0005398513@mcimail.com> Subject: Ascend Multiband Plus PDD Delay Does anyone see any significant Post Dial Delay when using the Ascend Multiband Plus? The Ascend unit has two ports; port number one goes to the T-1 and port number two goes to the PBX. The Ascend unit is basically used to separate out video signals from voice signals. The software version is 3.4R. The video works fine, however, when making a voice call, there is a 12-15 seconds delay. Is this an acceptable standard? It would appear to me to be too long and if there is a way to minimize this delay, I would like to know about it. What about an alternative configuration? Any help would be greatly appreciated. DJ Nguyen ------------------------------ From: henrys@primenet.com Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 07:10:59 -0800 Subject: Need Signalling Document I'm looking for a copy of "Telecommunications Planning:Signalling", produced by ITT Laboratories, Madrid in 1973. Does anybody have a copy or know where I can get one? Of course, I'll be happy to pay copying/mailing costs. Thanks a lot. Henry Stewart EFData Corporation (602) 350-3328 henrys@primenet.com ------------------------------ From: Joe Plescia Subject: ISC Securelink and ISDN Phones Date: 5 Nov 1995 04:33:01 GMT Organization: Plescia.Com Reply-To: jplescia@plescia.com Anyone have a good source for the ISC securelink internal ISDN card, s/t version. Also does anyone know of a good cheap source for a new or used ISDN voice set? Thanks in advance, Joe Visit our WWW SITE http://www.plescia.com Joseph P Plescia-Plescia Photo email jplescia@plescia.com 201.868.0065 201.868.0475fax Photofinishing, Studio, Imaging Paging, Beepers, Cellular Phones ------------------------------ From: Greg_Maydan@freddiemac.com (Maydan, Greg) Organization: Freddie Mac Date: Thu, 02 Nov 1995 14:29:38 -0000 Subject: AT&T Mail Security Weaknesses Does anyone know of any security weaknesses or break-ins of the AT&T mail system? I am looking for documentation to determine the security level of the AT&T mail system. This is a preliminary search so any information would help. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: stevej07@ix.netcom.com (James Johnson ) Subject: Re: US Phone Usable in France? Date: 6 Nov 1995 14:54:01 GMT Organization: Netcom I beleive all of the telephone service in France is ISDN with a proprietary NT1 interface. Normal analog POTS service may be available. Your best bet would be to ask the local service provider where your friend lives. ------------------------------ From: la@well.com (Lionel Ancelet) Subject: Re: US Phone Usable in France? Reply-To: la@well.com Organization: The Well Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 17:22:30 GMT Chester Howes wrote: > A customer at my local Radio Shack said he had sent a phone to a friend > in Paris and the then found out the plug (US modular) wouldn't fit the > jack in Paris. He want an adapter to mate the two. > I told him I thought the phone systems were not even compatible; a phone > made for the US market would probably not even work on the French phone > system. > Could anyone please advise if the systems are close enough for the phone > to work there? The friend in Paris is not supposed to use a US phone in France, for it doesn't have the French PTT approval (sort of FCC ID counterpart in France). However, US phone (and answering machines, and fax machines) do work fine in France. All that is needed is an RJ11-to-french-plug adapter. Easy to find in stores like Darty or BHV. Lionel "Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 18:11:53 +0000 From: jim cobban Subject: Re: Trying to Get Info From 604-555-1212 British Colombia, No Go Reply-To: Jim Cobban Organization: Bell-Northern Research Canada In article , Robert Casey wrote: > ... What this Canadian phone company (is it some sort of government > agency up there? THAT would explain it!) ... The phone company in British Columbia is BCTel and it is a wholly owned subsiduary of GTE. Although some of the local phone companies in Canada used to be either government departments or crown corporations, that is wholly owned by the provincial government, that was never true in BC and is no longer true in any other jurisdiction. Jim Cobban cobban@bnr.ca Phone: (613) 763-8013 BNR Ltd. bnrgate.bnr.ca!bcars153!jcobban FAX: (613) 763-5199 ------------------------------ From: JohnWPan@aol.com Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 10:47:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Split-T or Fractional T-1 Device dougneub@ix.netcom.com (Doug Neubert) wrote: > I am looking for a vendor who makes a Split-T or fractional T-1 device ... Loop Telecom makes Split-T or fractional T with drop and add feature. Though it allows up to 4 XN-56/64k V.35/449/530, they do not, as yet, have OCU or BRI. You can call them at 408-254-9300 or fax 408-254-9200. ------------------------------ From: fenner@parc.xerox.com (Bill Fenner) Subject: Re: Story From PacBell Very Doubtful Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 12:34:02 PST Organization: Xerox Palo Alto Research Center In article , Bren Smith wrote: > They tell me, and this is the real pisser part, that the PUC tariffs > prevent them from forwarding my line. Interesting. When I came home to almost the exact same problem (except in my case, the problem was PAC*Bell's), I ended up talking to a manager because I was upset about being without phone service for three days, which was what the original rep told me. The manager offered the call-forwarding solution (I hadn't thought of it myself). Perhaps next time you should get upset enough to get transferred higher up the chain. Bill ------------------------------ From: eross@terraport.net (Evan Ross) Subject: Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 14:40:09 GMT Organization: Flashpoint Database Consulting Limited ezx@ix.netcom.com (Ed Marion) wrote: > For that matter, with NAFTA and all that, why does it cost about 25 > cents per minute to call suburban Toronto from Houston during business > hours, when it only costs 12 cents per minute to call Seattle which is > 500 miles more distant? On 800 inbound, it is even worse ... 56 cents > vs 16 cents. If this could be explained, maybe this would tell me why Toronto to Hamilton (about 40 miles) is C$0.34/minute (about US$0.25) during business hours ... Our 800 inbound was also charged at an average of 0.35 per minute. Evan Ross | 238 Davenport Rd., Suite 333, Flashpoint Database Consulting Ltd. | Toronto, ON M5R 1J6 +1-416-920-6926 | Fax +1-416-920-6936 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 18:02:10 +0000 From: jim cobban Subject: Re: Why is Canada and Carribean 1+ Instead of 011+ ? Reply-To: Jim Cobban Organization: Bell-Northern Research Canada In article , Ed Marion wrote: > Does anyone know why Countries like Canada, Bermuda > the British Virgin Islands, and the Carribean in general are > all accessible from within the USA with a 1 + Area Code + number? The simple answer is that when the area codes were first handed out the "foreign" areas which got them were areas where the phone service was provided by subsiduaries of AT&T or other US based phone companies, such as GTE. AT&T did not divest itself of its holdings in Canada and the Carribean until the 1956 consent decree. GTE still operates two of the local telephone carriers and one of the long distance carriers in Canada. If you look at the Carribean you will notice that not all of the islands are in area code 809. In the case of the island of Hispaniola half (Dominican Republic) is in 809 and the other half (Haiti) is not. Islands/countries in area code 809 used to have their telephone service provided by AT&T while those which use country codes had their telephone service provided by Cable and Wireless or some other carrier. Prior to the revolution Cuba would also have been in area code 809. As to why service to Canada is more expensive there are a lot of factors. There has only been competition in long distance in Canada for a little over a year. The two main competitors, accounting for over 90% of the total are Stentor (consortium of the local phone companies) and Unitel (formerly owned by a consortium of the railroads, then by one of the railroads and a cable TV company, and now by AT&T together with the banks which hold the debt). These two companies are overstaffed and overequipped compared to US companies which have spent the last 15 years pinching pennies. Further they are both required to subsidize local service, which is currently estimated to be running at about $6 per month per line. Lastly is the legislated requirement for your call to go through separate US and Canadian long distance carries, so there is at least one more hand in your pocket than on a long distance call within the US. Jim Cobban jcobban@bnr.ca | Phone: (613) 763-8013 BNR Ltd. bnrgate.bnr.ca!bcars153!jcobban | FAX: (613) 763-5199 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 20:24:53 +0000 From: john dupont Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd. > Research by the Yankee Group shows that 69 percent of cellular users > think about the cost of a cellular call every time they pick up their > cellular phone. Also, 78 percent of cellular users say they would > encourage people to call them if they didn't have to pay for receiving > the calls. I wonder if the research has determined how many of those people encouraged to call will resent being stuck with the bill. I would. Cellular users who choose this option may notice a drop in incoming calls rather that a rise. Just my opinion, not BNR's. jdd ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 95 11:39:30 EST From: msb@sq.com Subject: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? The current movie "Devil in a Blue Dress" is set in Los Angeles in 1948. The protagonist and apparently all of his neighbors are black: I mention this because it helps define what part of the city they live in. He has a dial phone. Is this realistic? When did Los Angeles get dial phones? Mark Brader, msb@sq.com, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto ------------------------------ From: RING001@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu Subject: Voice Mail Policy Date: Mon, 06 Nov 95 11:52:25 CST Organization: University of Alabama at Birmingham Our university/medical center is looking into establishing a voice mail policy to cover both individuals and departments. Naturally the regs will be different for individuals and depts. Is there anyone out there who has already established such a policy who would be willing to share it with us? If so please email me at ring001@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu. Thank you for your attention to this post. ------------------------------ From: arora@risky.ecs.umass.edu Subject: Re: 888 Code Startup Not Delayed Date: 6 Nov 1995 15:22:52 GMT Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst The other day I called up the 800 directory (1-800-555-1212) and at the end of the recording where the lady announced the number I heard a little message announced to the caller something to the effect that in 1996 toll-free numbers may also start with the 888 area code. Sid 1-500-Hi-Sid-Hi // +1 413 253 7395 arora@kira.ecs.umass.edu s.arora@dpc.umassp.edu s.arora@ieee.org ------------------------------ From: rv01@gte.com (Robert Virzi) Subject: Re: Research Sources Wanted on Telecom Companies Date: 6 Nov 1995 16:21:29 GMT Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA In article , wrote: > I am interested in acquiring information on telecommunication > companies around the world. I would like to know if you are aware of > any free services that may be available, where I would be able to find > research on Telcom companies; not only financial data, but also > information such as digitalization%, lines per employee, etc. Perhaps you've already looked, but I would start by going through the past few years worth of annual reports from the firms you are interested in. Lots of info in those reports, although it can be hard to find underneath the gloss. Bob Virzi rvirzi@gte.com +1(617)466-2881 ------------------------------ From: weigl@sam.inria.fr (Konrad Weigl) Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Date: 6 Nov 1995 17:41:07 GMT Organization: INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis (Fr) In article , gary.novosielski@ sbaonline.gov writes: > Jeffrey Rhodes writes: >> It's hard to believe that nearly every day someone asks "are two >> cell-phones, one number legal?" > On the contrary, I think "basic judgment," or common sense, is what's > behind these questions in the first place. The GSM D2 Network in Germany offers two cards with identical Subscriber ID number for a small additional charge. It makes already sense if you have a phone in your car and a mobile in addition. Konrad Weigl ------------------------------ From: fenner@parc.xerox.com (Bill Fenner) Subject: Re: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 12:38:04 PST Organization: Xerox Palo Alto Research Center In article , Bruce Albrecht wrote: > I am looking for Unix sources to send messages to an alphanumeric > pager. I know of three: 1) 'sendpage', a perl script that a friend and I hacked up from an article in TELECOM Digest; 2) 'tpage', a few perl scripts and a couple of C programs; 3) 'hylafax', a FAX system that just happens to also do alpha paging. I prefer 'hylafax', not only because I like being able to send faxes, but also because I like its queueing system and in general trust the code more than 'tpage'. 'sendpage' has always worked for me but has no built-in queueing and error recovery depends on a human. I don't know where to get 'tpage' any more; 'hylafax' is available from ftp.sgi.com:/sgi/fax . Bill ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #468 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 7 17:56:49 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA22389; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 17:56:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 17:56:49 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511072256.RAA22389@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #469 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Nov 95 17:56:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 469 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed (Peter Polishuk) Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed (Navneet Patel) Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Re: Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn (Eric Ewanco) Re: Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn (Mike Sandman) Re: Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn (Michael P. Deignan) Re: Physical Layer Testing For Fiber Optic Transmitters/Receivers (Gaines) Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: Another UK Number Change (David Hough) Re: Bell Canada Files Residential ISDN (Marcel Mongeon) Re: Sharing One Phone Line With Multiple Modems (Richard Barnaby) Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? (Joseph Singer) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (mjf@vnet.ibm.com) Re: Ascend Multiband Plus PDD Delay (Kevin Smith) Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople (G. Babb) Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople (Mike Rehmus) Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople (Mark Malson) Re: Last Laugh! Go Directly to Wall Street; Do Not Pass Go (David Whiteman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 13:38:42 +0000 From: Peter_Polishuk@nt.com Subject: Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed Organization: Nortel (Northern Telecom) In article , Rpadula@aol.com wrote: > I've just received a package from BellSouth offering me Call Waiting > Deluxe in conjunction with Caller ID. The gag is that you can get the > name and number of the person on the other side of the call waiting > beep. > I presume this is using the ADSI signalling method, and they are > offering to sell the display telephone, a PowerTouch 350, with the > service for about $150. Does anybody have recommendations on this > telephone? I understand that Northern Telecom (or Nortel or whatever > it is they are calling themselves nowadays) makes a PowerTouch 350 > phone; I wonder if this is the same unit, only with the BellSouth logo > on the front. > I would appreciate any comments, good or bad, about the phone and/or > service. The PowerTouch 350 is made by Nortel. BellSouth is a distributor of the phone, and Nortel does co-branding with them, so that they may place their logo on the phone. I am biased, but the PowerTouch 350 is a great phone. Especially with Caller ID on Call Waiting, you can choose to accept a call-waiting call, send it a message, or send it to voice mail. Once interactive services kick in, you will be happy you already have the phone!! For more info, call 1-800-NORTEL or contact me. Peter Polishuk Nortel Marketing Communications Switching Networks ESN 255-4295 or 992-4295 Peter_Polishuk@nt.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Nov 95 11:11:57 EST From: nap@snt.bellsouth.com (Navneet Patel) Subject: Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed Rpadula@aol.com (Rich Padula) wrote: > I've just received a package from BellSouth offering me Call Waiting > Deluxe in conjunction with Caller ID. The gag is that you can get the > name and number of the person on the other side of the call waiting > beep. The Northern telecom makes the PowerTouch 350 telephone. The BellSouth just provides it to it's customers. The logo on the phone is that of Northern Telecom. We have used PowerTouch 350 to test all ADSI service including CallWaiting Deluxe. There are other manufactures who makes ADSI phones (Phillips), but PowerTouch is less expensive and have proved very reliable in our testing. Navneet Patel Science & Technology BellSouth nap@snt.blsouth.com ------------------------------ From: rec@goodnet.com (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Subject: Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed Organization: GoodNet Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 00:05:56 GMT Rpadula@aol.com wrote: > I understand that Northern Telecom (or Nortel or whatever > it is they are calling themselves nowadays) makes a PowerTouch 350 > phone; I wonder if this is the same unit, only with the BellSouth logo > on the front. The '350 is a Northern Telecom phone. USWest sells these phones in conjunction with a service called _The Home Receptionist_ which provides screen driven custom calling and voice mail features. It also provides Caller Id on Call Wait. There is also a trial of a Home banking service. The services are available in Grand Junction CO and various other USW areas. You can get the phone/service through the home office consulting center. Richard Eyre-Eagles, KJ7MU Tempe, Arizona ------------------------------ From: eje@xyplex.com (Eric Ewanco) Subject: Re: Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn Date: 06 Nov 1995 21:28:08 GMT Organization: XYPLEX In article ptownson@massis.lcs. mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) writes: > I honestly did not think federal agents in this country could go to > another country and charge residents of that country with violations > of laws in this country. Well, we are talking about *Mexico* here, where a few well-placed big peso notes (or better yet, greenbacks) in the hands of government officials could probably open a lot of closed doors for you. It was probably cheaper to go in and grab them than to try to extradite them (n.b. the above principle has a converse too). That of course doesn't make it ethical or legal. Eric Ewanco eje@world.std.com Software Engineer, Xyplex Inc. Littleton, Mass. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ethical and legal be damned! Since when were those considerations of any importance to a lot of people who work in federal law enforcement? PAT] ------------------------------ From: mike@sandman.com (Mike Sandman) Subject: Re: Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn Date: Tue, 07 Nov 1995 02:50:12 GMT Organization: Mike Sandman Enterprises ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) wrote: > I honestly did not think federal agents in this country could go to > another country and charge residents of that country with violations > of laws in this country. What they got them on was (although being If the United States can go into another country, take it over, and bring its leader back to the United States and lock him up in jail forever (Panama), I'm sure they have no trouble getting anybody they want in any country. The only thing that scares me about that, is whether the wackos that lead other countries figure that what's good for the goose is good for the gander -- and arrests Clinton or whoever? What can the US say to that? Some say it's already been done when Cuba had Kennedy killed. Pretty scary! Mike Sandman 708-980-7710 E-mail: mike@sandman.com WWW: http://www.sandman.com Our 48 page catalog of Uniqueq Telecom Products & Tools is now on the World Wide Web. We have a fantastic assortment of Cable Installation Tools and Training Videos to help you use them. NEW "Basic ISDN" Training Video is now available. Also check out our Telephony History Page, which contains ads and articles from telephony related magazines from the first part of the century. ------------------------------ From: kd1hz@anomaly.ideamation.com (Michael P. Deignan) Subject: Re: Foreign Sysadmin Jailed For Computer Kiddie Porn Date: 6 Nov 1995 22:11:53 -0500 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. In article , TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > I honestly did not think federal agents in this country could go to > another country and charge residents of that country with violations > of laws in this country. What they got them on was (although being > elsewhere, outside the USA) sending child porn *into* the USA. I > thought federal agents could only deal with what people here in this > country did, for example, being in possession of it, or transmitting > it around internally. I guess I was wrong. Even the US Attorney's > office however agrees this is a 'first'. Are you sure it was customs officials and not the BATF? The BATF even has their own attack helicopters. I wouldn't be surprised if the BATF had planned a night-time raid into Mexican territory to "liberate" the evil porn-lords complete with support from the BATF SEALS. I wonder how many Mexican military men were slaughtered during this operation ... unless, of course, the Mexican government gave them permission to go into the country -- its pretty amazing what 80 billion or so in foreign aid will do to your indecisiveness ... MD [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the papers they said it was Customs. Anyway, I don't think the Bureau of Tobacco, Alcohol and Fire Arms has a child pornography division do they? Oh, maybe they do, who knows? Its the growing rage these days, to investigate the net for evidence of child porn in every newsgroup, at every site, etc. You have to wonder what goes through the minds of some of these people who start these investigations and keep on fueling them and feeding them. I mean, could *you* deal emotionally with having employment where your duties consisted of sitting logged in on a computer all day to America OnLine using a bogus screen name purporting to be a child or teenager trying to get some older person to 'start something'? And who can forget that lady in Minnesota who (thankfully) *used to be* a proesecutor there ... She had some fixation on child porn which led her to file criminal charges against hundreds of people in this one little town; everyone accusing the others; everyone convinced that *everyone else* was a molestor, etc. No matter who you were, you could not escape the stench and uglieness she created, she was that vicious in her fixation. Now come reports from Wenatchee, Washington, population 17,000 that a local police officer there is hung up on it. He is pushing his campaign to the limits with the result being dozens of people arrested including *half* the membership of one church. Teachers, ministers, parents, shopkeepers; he is rounding them all up with the most outlandish charges of child molestation and child pornography you have ever heard in your life. Apparently all he does each day is work on his 'investigation'. What must go through the minds of these people in their campaigns? It is a great way to help get this net under control: stop the world while we investigate and prosecute child pornographers. Don't take my word for it ... ask anyone at the FBI, Customs, etc. And you know who the real victims are? The children ... because this has gotten to the point that no one pays attention any longer in the real instances. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 11:24:08 +1000 From: J.Gaines@citr.uq.oz.au (Jerry Gaines) Subject: Re: Physical Layer Testing For Fiber Optic Transmitters/Receivers On Tue, 31 Oct 1995, imirman@optoelectronics.ultranet.com (Ilya Mirman) wrote: > I am curious: when do people stop testing the physical layer or fiber > optic transmitters and receivers? Obvously, the individual components > get tested during their manufacture (spectral characteristics, pulse > performance ("EYE"), Error Rate performance, etc. Presumably, they > are also tested once integrated into the system manufacturers' boards. > > But, at some point (deployment, maintenance, etc.) people no longer > look at the eye diagrams or spectral characteristics -- instead, they > look for "higher layer" issues, such as sending packets, system > jitter, etc. > My question: when, exactly, does the "physical layer" testing stop, > and higher level testing begin? I don't have the answer to your question, but I have a related topic I'm trying to attack: what is the market for tools which emulate SONET/SDH network transmission elements? The trade press and analysts have little to say about network emulation/simulation tools. But surely the growing complexity of networks, and the increasing cost of mistakes in network deployment, is driving a trend towards greater willingness on the part of network managers (public and private) to spend money on tools which let them simulate the transmission and switching performance of network elements, subnets (specifically, new subnets inserted into or added to an existing network) or entire networks. It seems to me that these kinds of tools will be particularly important for SONET/SDH networks, because the cost of screwing up is so high. It's one thing to rewire a corporate LAN, another altogether to dig up 1,800 miles of bidirectional, self-healing SONET loop ... The only insight I might have into your question is that the physical layer testing you describe is probably the principal consideration when one is trying to establish the performance characteristics of the element per se, in isolation. That layer of testing probably mostly phases out when one starts asking the question, how will this element behave in a network? At this stage the more important concern becomes higher layer characteristics like system jitter (transmission) or cell "burstiness" (switching, esp. ATM switching). One might infer from this that most of the physical layer testing probably takes place in an R&D lab or manufacturing facility; but once a vendor or carrier gets hold of the gear, and begins to plan how to deploy that element into a new or existing network, the testing focus shifts to network characteristics: how does this element perform when combined with others? Regards, Jerry Gaines CiTR Pty Limited Telecommunications Network and Services Management Brisbane, Australia - Boulder, Colorado J.Gaines@citr.uq.oz.au +61-7-3365-4321/phone http://www.citr.uq.oz.au ....4399/fax ------------------------------ From: Jeffrey Rhodes <71562.635@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Date: 7 Nov 1995 04:09:35 GMT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services In article , gary.novosielski@ sbaonline.gov writes: > The GSM D2 Network in Germany offers two cards with identical Subscriber > ID number for a small additional charge. > It makes already sense if you have a phone in your car and a mobile in > addition. GSM will probably "sound" better than cloned US cell-phones, too. I doubt they'll ever be less expensive to use, or for that matter, less expensive than IS-136. Jeffrey Rhodes at jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com ------------------------------ From: David Hough Subject: Re: Another UK Number Change Date: Tue, 07 Nov 95 08:07:07 GMT Organization: Chaotic In article matthew@itconsult.co.uk (Matthew Richardson) writes: > It is true that certain Reading numbers have been issued starting with > a zero. They can only be dialled by prefixing them with 01734, even > from within Reading, although they would then be treated as a local > call. The numbers aren't supposed to be dialed direct. AFAIK they were issued to companies running premium-rate or free services. All such numbers map onto 'real' numbers somewhere, as do other number prefixes with special tariffs such as 0891, 0800, 0345 etc. Dave djh@sectel.com Tel +44 1285 655 766 Fax +44 1285 655 595 ------------------------------ From: marcelm@freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Marcel Mongeon) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Files Residential ISDN Date: 7 Nov 1995 14:19:14 GMT Organization: Hamilton-Wentworth FreeNet, Ontario, Canada. Ron Kawchuk (kawchuk@io.org) wrote: > Bell Canada filed for residential ISDN on October 27, 1995 > $51 to $57 per month for 2 ISDN channels. (2B+D) > Pay per call in peak (Business day) times. > $1 per hour 7AM to 7PM weekdays per 64k channel... $2 per hour for 128K > bps?? > Request CRTC approval for Dec 1, 1995 An interesting aspect of this proposal is that the peak rates for home internet usage is more like 7 pm to 12 midnight! Between 7am and 7pm the usage from home (unless it is a home based business or the like) should be relatively light. Marcel D. Mongeon aa001@freenet.hamilton.on.ca President, Hamilton-Wentworth FreeNet Technology Lawyer and Trade-mark Agent, Ontario, Canada Tel: (905) 528-5936 ------------------------------ From: barnaby@world.std.com (Richard Barnaby) Subject: Re: Sharing One Phone Line With Multiple Modems Organization: Business Support Services Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:04:28 GMT jhope@sam.neosoft.com (John S. Hope) wrote: > Does anyone know of a company that makes a modem multiplexor? That > is, I need a box that will accept one phone line and be able to switch > between async posts depending on what command strings I issue. > I will be using one phone line to dial into the management functions > of several systems. > Please provide any information you have including product name, model, > company contact, and any experience with the product. Call Baytech at 800-523-2702. They'll have more than you could possibly want. - a satisfied customer ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 06:42:10 -0800 From: jsinger@scn.org (Joseph Singer) Subject: Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? Reply-To: jsinger@scn.org msb@sq.com writes: > The current movie "Devil in a Blue Dress" is set in Los Angeles in > 1948. The protagonist and apparently all of his neighbors are black: > I mention this because it helps define what part of the city they > live in. > He has a dial phone. Is this realistic? When did Los Angeles get > dial phones? I don't know why it wouldn't be the "norm" to have dial telephones in Los Angeles in 1948. Dial phone central offices were installed from the early 20s on the east coast. The east coast cities very commonly had panel common control switching while I believe that Los Angeles was mostly step-by-step. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong on this. JOSEPH SINGER SEATTLE, WASHINGTON USA jsinger@scn.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Chicago had completely manual service until 1939, when the conversion began. The downtown area was converted first, followed by the neighborhoods one at a time. Conversion to dial was halted at the start of 1942 when Western Electric was seized by the government and put exclusively into the war effort. When industries were released early in 1946 to go back into regular production and service, the conversion to dial resumed in Chicago and continued until its completion in 1951 with the conversion of the central office which served the 'new' Ohare Airport. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mjf@vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: 7 Nov 1995 14:58:53 GMT Organization: ISSC Southeast Region Reply-To: mjf@vnet.ibm.com In , john dupont writes: >> Research by the Yankee Group shows that 69 percent of cellular users >> think about the cost of a cellular call every time they pick up their >> cellular phone. Also, 78 percent of cellular users say they would >> encourage people to call them if they didn't have to pay for receiving >> the calls. > I wonder if the research has determined how many of those people > encouraged to call will resent being stuck with the bill. I would. > Cellular users who choose this option may notice a drop in incoming > calls rather that a rise. I agree with this one. If I am crusing the yellow pages looking for a plumber, for example, and I call a number and am told I will be charged, I will hang up immediately and dial the next number in the book. If people are going to do this, they should provide an alternate, free number (maybe to an answering service), or have it set up so you can leave them a voicemail message if you don't want to pay. Also, how is the per-minute rate billed? What if I call a plumber who has not used up his prepaid minutes for the month? Is it free for me then? What if I call one plumber who's on a plan that charges him $.25 per minute, and the next call reaches one who pays $.50? Will the caller get any feedback or control over this, or will it be a standard rate? What about cell-to-cell? Will I get charged for BOTH my airtime AND his? It sounds like a good idea in many cases, but it remains to be seen how it's implemented. I for one am a cellular user but I would be extremely reluctant to make a call to someone on one of these plans, since so much of what it would cost appears to be out of my control. Later, Mike ------------------------------ From: Kevin Smith Subject: Re: Ascend Multiband Plus PDD Delay Date: 7 Nov 1995 18:41:41 GMT Organization: Ascend Communications Inc. Djung Nguyen <0005398513@mcimail.com> wrote: > The video works fine, however, when making a voice call, there is a > 12-15 seconds delay. Is this an acceptable standard? It would appear > to me to be too long and if there is a way to minimize this delay, I > would like to know about it. What about an alternative configuration? > Any help would be greatly appreciated. This is normal and cannot be modified. The receiving side - collecting the DTMF digits has a ten second timer to allow for "non-senderized" PBXs to complete forwarding all dialed digits. Kevin ------------------------------ From: gARetH baBB Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople Reply-To: gbabb@gink.demon.co.uk Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 19:07:48 GMT Organization: Gink In article , reo@netcom.com (Ross Oliver) wrote: > I am so sick of phone solicitation that I don't even bother to be > polite anymore. I made the mistake of donating to one of some > "law enforcement takes the kids to the circus" drive a while ago, > and now I must be on some "phone suckers" list because I have been The European Commission is at the moment coming up with a directive which if passed will force all telephone sales outfits to get *written* permission from people before phoning them. The report on the radio I heard was quite amusing, they had a represen- tative of the UK Telesales Association on and he was obviously "distressed" by it all. Serves him right :-) ------------------------------ From: Mike Rehmus Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople Date: 7 Nov 1995 14:24:08 GMT Organization: Portal Communications (service) reo@netcom.com (Ross Oliver) wrote: > I am so sick of phone solicitation that I don't even bother to be > polite anymore. I made the mistake of donating to one of some > "law enforcement takes the kids to the circus" drive a while ago, > and now I must be on some "phone suckers" list because I have been > barraged by similar solicitations ever since, usually Saturday > mornings at 7:30am The sad part is the people calling you work for a boiler-room operation and the police/firemen/your favorite group see very little of the $. Doubly sad is that this is the case for most charitable organizations. A great put-off is to ask them if their organization is as efficient as the Salvation Army. Then ask them what percent of contributions go to the group for which they are collecting. Then ask them if they are part of the group or a collection agency. When you ask them questions, they usually get very nervous. Fortunately, we have two of the best charities in the U.S. here in San Jose ... Second Harvest and the ubiquitous Salvation Army. The next most efficient group is a far distant third place. Best regards, Mike Rehmus [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: While it is true that the collectors keep the biggest portion of what is collected with the charity seeing only a small percentage of the overall amount, the fact is that the amount of money collected overall is so huge that the charity gets a lot more money than they could ever collect on their own, given their own resources and fund-raising abilities. The polioceman/fireman group would never come close to getting the amount of money they do if they tried to do it on their own. PAT] ------------------------------ From: markm@xetron.com (Mark Malson) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Getting Rid of Pesky Phone Salespeople Organization: Xetron Corporation Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 20:18:21 GMT In article , reo@netcom.com (Ross Oliver) wrote: > I am so sick of phone solicitation that I don't even bother to be > polite anymore. I made the mistake of donating to one of some > "law enforcement takes the kids to the circus" drive a while ago, I always tell the solicitor that I require a financial statement before I would consider pledging any amount of money. In these scams (like the one you mentioned), the fundraising organization typically gets well over half the money raised. Move over, Jim and Tammy Bakker. Most organizations do not want to go to the trouble, yet in many states they are _required by law_ to send you a statement if you ask for it. The worst offender I have had experience with is Mothers Against Drunk Driving, who immediately HUNG UP when I asked for a statement. Others will at least promise you one and then never send it. Some will pressure you for a pledge so they can fill in a number (and get their cut, no doubt) on the slip they mail you. And the rare few I've actually gotten a statement from were still not worthy of a donation. The only really good financial statement I've seen is the American Cancer Society's. Mark Malso markm@xetron.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 17:57:55 MST From: David Whiteman Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Go Directly to Wall Street; Do Not Pass Go In comp.dcom.telecom TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Anthony Sarivola, 40, of Allenwood, PA is a smart man. Using just his [stuff about how he cheated people while in prison.] > charges. His entire 'office' consisted of a prisoner phone. Pat, The {Los Angeles Times} and the {Los Angeles Daily News} stated that this prisoner used a cellular phone as his office which was smuggled in. David Whiteman dbw@primenet.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The {Chicago Tribune} had him using a 'prisoner phone'. No matter, it still seems pretty fantastic. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #469 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 7 19:54:03 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id TAA02925; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 19:54:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 19:54:03 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511080054.TAA02925@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #470 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Nov 95 19:54:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 470 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Digital Telephony Overview (VTW Billwatch via Shabbir J. Safdar) Houston CO's (Bill Blackwell) 500 Service Information Wanted (Kathi Denial) The End of TelecomDocs (David Devereaux-Weber) Voice Mail Uses Different Frequencies Than Dialing? (Eric Levy-Myers) Man Accused of Scamming 1300 With Prize Notices (Tad Cook) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Gordon Burditt) Online Phone Book Wanted (Hank Nussbacher) Looking For Telecommuting Data (John Kennedy) Redirect/Forward Incoming Calls (Hari K. Maddali) Telecom Management Home Page (doster@vax.telcores.com) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: shabbir@VTW.ORG (Shabbir J. Safdar, VTW) Subject: Digital Telephony Overview Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 23:11:31 -0500 Reply-To: vtw-announce@VTW.ORG VTW BillWatch #23 VTW BillWatch: A weekly newsletter tracking US Federal legislation affecting civil liberties. BillWatch is published at the end of every week as long as Congress is in session. (Congress is in session) BillWatch is produced and published by the Voters Telecommunications Watch (vtw@vtw.org) (We're not the EFF :-) Issue #23, Date: Sun Nov 5 20:44:08 EST 1995 Do not remove this banner. See distribution instructions at the end. QUOTES FOR THE WEEK We culled these quotes while watching a CNN interview with James Kallstrom regarding the wiretap funding. The interviewer was completely unprepared, but it was interesting to read the quotes. I mean, really read the quotes. Note that the FBI is a pretty easy target these days. Let's look at the first one: The report in the NY Times was very misleading. We do wiretapping based on probable cause, where it's necessary. We do it through a process where every citizen's rights are protected. We don't want to protect the criminals. As we examine the above quote, it strikes the reader as curious to note that people are not criminals until after a trial. We can't stand for abuses. We have to monitor the system. Citizens who are not committing crimes should have a total right to privacy. VTW is quite relieved to see a high-ranking official of the FBI stating support for the right to privacy. Not just a little privacy, but TOTAL privacy. One wonders whether Mr. Kallstrom agrees with VTW's view that to enforce privacy we need access to strong non-escrowed cryptography. (probably not) This week's quotes are from James Kalstromm (Asst. Dir of the FBI) on CNN 11/2/95 (23:15pm). COMMENTARY ON FBI WIRETAP PROPOSALS You'd have to be living without television, newspapers, or radio not to have seen all the flap over the FBI's proposal for wiretap funding. There has been a tremendous amount of misinformation in the press and on the net, so we'd like to take this opportunity to put all of this into perspective. Having opposed this legislative measure last year, we are painfully well- informed on the nature of the debate. The wiretapping plan you're seeing debated now is actually the funding phase of last year's "Digital Telephony" bill, now known as CALEA (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act) Sponsored by Sen. Leahy (D-VT) and Rep. Edwards (previously D-CA), the bill was extremely controversial among civil liberties groups, but received very little mainstream press, and a moderate amount of debate on the Hill. The FBI had strongly suggested that advancing changes in technology would make it impossible for them to carry out court-authorized communications interceptions. Although they never produced public proof of a foiled interception, the general feel in Congress was to grant them the benefit of the doubt and give them a bill that would accomodate their needs. A bill was written that would require the telecommunications industry to build in wiretap functionality into their products, such as telephone switches. This is where the debate in the civil liberties community began. The Electronic Frontier Foundation used their connections and their position to hack up the bill to remove several provisions. The ability for any detective to issue an administrative subpoena (doesn't require a judge) to get transactional information such as who you called and for how long was removed, now requiring the approval of a judge. In addition, any inclusion of Internet services was removed. This meant that Netscape would not have to build in special wiretapping code should you fall under an a court-authorized interception order during an investigation. In addition, the FBI would now be forced to state publicly its requirements for wiretapping, and the justifications for the amount of wiretapping they wanted to do, so they could tell the communications companies what sorts of capability to build into their products. This probably seemed like a good compromise for the FBI at the time. They reduce the resistance to their bill, in exchange for which they had to publish some information that was probably semi-public anyway. They're probably kicking themselves now. The logic at the EFF was that Congress was going to pass such a bill this year anyway, so wouldn't we rather have one that improved privacy in some places and limited its scope in others, rather than let them get everything they want by working with legislators that are not privacy-savvy. Sort of an "enemy you know is less dangerous than one you don't" argument. Other groups disagreed. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and the Voters Telecommunications Watch both led an online campaign to fight the bill. In the end, the bill was passed without much floor debate and very little media attention. One stickler in all of this was the cost. The telecommunications industry said, rightfully so, that these additional features weren't market-driven (unless you're a Third World dictator buying telecommunications hardware to spy on your people) so they were basically being taxed unfairly. The FBI responded by saying that before any changes would be expected, the Federal Government would authorize the spending of US$500 million as reimbursement for their loss. This funding phase brings us to the present time. On Monday October 16 1995, the FBI published in the Federal Register it's requirements for wiretapping capacity. Civil liberties advocates salivated, knowing that for the first time in history, this backroom process that never saw any public accountability was going to be scrutinized in the light of day. Many civil liberties advocates hoped the media would finally report this as newsworthy, assuming that should the American people hear about it, they would be appalled. The media responded in spades, with paranoia about Big Brother and wiretapping abuses making front page news throughout the country. This couldn't have come at a worse time for the Administration. Reeling from the media flap over Waco and Ruby Ridge, law enforcement is not having its best public relations year. Civil liberties advocates went on the attack, deconstructing the published wiretap requirements and asking the FBI exactly what they needed all these wiretaps for. The root of the issue lies in a subtlety that no one anticipated. Civil liberties advocates thought the FBI, having previously conducted around 1,000 interceptions per year, would simply publish a number that gave them some "growing room" given some assumption that crime was generally increasing. Instead, the FBI published percentages. The report in the Federal Register said that if a telephone switch can accomodate X number of subscribers, then the switch must be capable of performing X * Y% of interceptions SIMULTANEOUSLY, where Y% has a minimum amount of .05%, but can rise as high as 1% if you live in a geographic area with lots of crime. Here is where the debate begins, and the misinformation seeps in. When you look at the number of subscribers, that number may be much different depending on how you interpret it. Assume that the phone switch that serves your area has 1,000,000 subscribers on it, and you live in a high crime area, such as VTW's birthplace, New York City. The math is simple, 1% of 1,000,000 subscribers is 10,000 simultaneous wiretaps. Isn't this a little high? Not only have there been only about 1,000 wiretaps authorized in recent years, but they weren't all at once, and all within the same neighborhood! To their credit, the FBI says they were misinterpreted. A close look at the announcement in the Federal Register shows them to be right. However you should be just as alarmed. The FBI claims that just because a telephone switch can accomodate 1,000,000 people doesn't mean they can all pick up the phone and dial a friend at once. If you look closely at the notice in the Federal Register, it says: the percentage is applied to the engineered subscriber capacity of a switch Presumably, if they had meant total subscribers, they would have said total subscribers. It would be uncharacteristic of the FBI is ask for less than what they need. However this doesn't actually make the numbers so much better than you should be unconcerned. The number is still appalling higher than anything previously requested, and you should be very concerned. Take the phone switch in our previous example. Assume that only half the subscribers can actually pick up their handsets and make a call simultaneously. That cuts the actual number of simultaneous required interceptions to 5,000, and that's just in New York. It's unreasonable for our government to fund such an activity without the FBI explaining their reasons for needing this much capacity. Has there been a great leap in the last few years of crimes for which interceptions are the only available tool? The Electronic Privacy Information Center is fond of pointing out that interceptions in the last few years have been primarily for drugs and gambling. EPIC asserts that not one wiretap has been authorized in the investigation of domestic terrorism such as the World Trade Center or Oklahoma City bombings. The second misinterpretation of these figures is the common printing of the fact that the FBI wishes to wiretap every 1 in 400 or 1 in 100 telephones. We're not really sure how anyone came up with these numbers, as that would apply to specific geographic areas only, not the country as a whole. To blanketly print these numbers without actually talking about the area they apply to is to resort to unnecessary hysteria. The FBI's proposal is chilling enough that we don't need that much hyperbole to justify public concern. Two groups are conducting high profile campaigns on this issue. We urge you to follow them and stay informed. Here is an alphabetical list: The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) is a new organization staffed by many of the people who previously worked on this issue at the EFF. CDT is attempting to answer such questions as: * Has the FBI met all the public accountability and oversight criteria required by the statute? and * Does the requested capacity accurately reflect the needs of law enforcement? You can monitor their work by checking out their World Wide Web page at URL:http://www.cdt.org/ The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is conducting a campaign to deny funding for the bill, a continuation of last-year's campaign to prevent the passage of the bill itself. You can monitor their work by checking out their World Wide Web page at: URL:http://www.epic.org/ ----------------------- SUBSCRIPTION AND REPRODUCTION INFORMATION You can receive BillWatch via email, fax, gopher or WWW: To subscribe via email, send mail to vtw-announce-request@vtw.org with "subscribe vtw-announce Firstname Lastname" in the subject line. To unsubscribe from BillWatch send mail to vtw-announce-request@vtw.org with "unsubscribe vtw-announce" in the subject line. Send mail to files@vtw.org with "send billwatch" in the SUBJECT LINE to receive the latest version of BillWatch. To subscribe via fax, call (718) 596-2851 and leave the information requested by the recording. You may unsubscribe by calling the same number. BillWatch can be found on the World Wide Web at http://www.vtw.org/billwatch/ BillWatch can be found in Gopherspace at: gopher -p1/vtw/billwatch/ gopher.panix.com Permission to reproduce BillWatch non-commercially is granted provide the banner and copyright remain intact. Please send a copy of your non-commercial publication to vtw@vtw.org for our scrapbook. For permission to commercially reproduce BillWatch, please contact vtw@vtw.org. ___________________________________________________________________________ Copyright 1995 Steven Cherry & Shabbir J. Safdar ___________________________________________________________________________ End VTW BillWatch Issue #23, Date: Sun Nov 5 20:44:08 EST 1995 ------------------------------ From: bear@electrotex.com (Bill Blackwell) Subject: Houston CO's Date: Tue, 07 Nov 1995 09:13:29 -0600 I am somewhat stymied in my dealings with Southwestern Bell (SWB, or Sharks Want Blood) in trying to find out switch-types installed in the Houston LATA Central Offices (area code 713). While getting a list of the CO names is rather straight forward (it's printed in the front of the phone book...), SWB says that there are "hundreds" of CO's in Houston, and that getting a list of the switch-types in them would be prohibitive. CombiNet (before they got bought out by Cisco) had a DB of just such a type as I'm looking for on the 'Net. However, in the great reshuffling that has undoubtedly occurred, this seems to have dropped off of the planet. (I've run the gauntlet of Voice Mail, and "Oh, that's not my department, let me transfer you..." at Cisco to no avail). Compunding this problem, is that I'd kinda like to know hwo the CO's are interconnected as well (the hip bone's connected to the jaw bone...;-)). I can understand networks, and this is just a big network, ...right? Help! If any of you gurus out there have such a list compiled, know of the location of such a list, can point me to books that have helpful suggestions, or just have new and _creative_ ways of telling me I'm an idiot, then I'd appreciate it. Oh, yeah, the reason that I need this is for a study into our "telecommuting options" and certain vendors' equipment seems to be telco-sensitive. So, having the desire to be an informed consumer ... Thanks, Bill Blackwell bear@hic.net Houston, Texas, USA ------------------------------ From: kathi_denial@unet.net.com (Kathi Denial) Subject: 500 Service Information Wanted Date: 7 Nov 1995 17:15:56 GMT Organization: N.E.T. Does anyone have any information regarding the 500 service offered by AT&T? What is the suggested way to program this into the PBX? Kathi Denial [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do we have information on AT&T 500 Service here? Do we? Do we! Anyone want to help Kathi out with the information she needs? Please respond to her. Kathi, you might also want to review the Telecom Archives and the back issues files for this topic. It has received a great deal of attention here over the past couple of years. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 13:40:27 -0600 From: David Devereaux-Weber Subject: The End of TelecomDocs TelecomDocs subscribers: This is the end of the list TelecomDocs. The FCC has implemented their own list to distribute the Daily Digest, and it no longer makes sense for us to provide this service. A most heartfelt thanks to Bob Keller for his tireless attention to this task. As Bob mentioned in his last post: If you want to subscribe directly to the FCC list, send an email message to: subscribe@info.fcc.gov with the following command in the body of the message: subscribe digest It will not be necessary for subscribers to unsubscribe from this list. We will remove it from the listserver. Thank you for your continued support. Sincerely, David Devereaux-Weber Barry Orton David Devereaux-Weber, P.E. djdevere@facstaff.wisc.edu The University of Wisconsin - Madison Division of Information Technology Network Engineering (608)262-3584(voice) (608)265-5838(FAX) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And beleive me, many of us are sorry to see you shutting down. Yours was a very valuable service. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Nov 95 11:34:49 EST From: Eric Levy-Myers Subject: Voice Mail Uses Different Frequencies Than Dialing? I recently installed a four line, non KSU, telephone system from TT Systems, Model 4012-TT. It works great, nice features, and low price, etc. However, in Bell Atlantic's voice mail (inside a Centrex, I guess) , the systems does not recognize the 3 or 6 key. For normal dialing, the 3 and 6 keys work fine. All the other keys work fine. Bell Atlantic blames the phones, without any suggestion as to why they work in the normal system and not in the voice mail. TT Systems says that some Telecom's have recently tightened the frequency requirements and they are working on a fix. But they seem utterly mystified as to why the telecom's have suddenly changed ("tightened") their standards. Anyone else have this problem? Help. Eric_Levy-Myers@mail.amsinc.com ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: Man Accused of Scamming 1300 With Prize Notices Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 15:00:53 PST LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) -- A scam that enticed 1,300 people into sending $39 each to collect bogus $50,000 prizes ended with the arrest of a man accused of sending the fake notices out by certified mail. Robert William Gordon III of Atlanta faces federal fraud charges for allegedly sending 1,400 letters telling recipients that they had won $50,000 and just needed to sign a certificate and send a check for $39 to collect. Responses poured in from 38 states and the District of Columbia, some sent by overnight mail, Attorney General Winston Bryant said. Recipients probably thought the letters were genuine because they were sent via certified mail and contained an impressive looking winner's certificate. Authorities became involved when a woman contacted Bryant's office last week to ask if the offer from Consumer Response Group was legitimate. Investigators dressed as Mail Boxes Etc. employees arrested Gordon Thursday when he checked his box. He faces arraignment Tuesday on charges of mail fraud, telemarketing fraud and use of fictitious identification. More than $50,000 in checks were awaiting him. None had been cashed, Bryant said. Gordon declined to comment, and his lawyer could not be reached. ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lerctr.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 19:52:18 GMT This announcement of caller-pays cellular service leaves out one very important part: how do I block calls to caller-pays cellular numbers? Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You don't. You pay your phone bill each month and be grateful that people who made phone calls on your system behind your back or while you were asleep were able to reach their party wherever they might be, on land or sea or in the air. You'll probably soon find yourself in the same situation as Kathi (earlier in this issue) who -- I assume -- found herself stuck with some 500 charges on a PBX she is responsible for, and now wants to know what to do about it. I imagine what will happen is that all the cell phones equipped in that way will have to be on their own prefix(es) for billing purposes. Once you find out the prefix(es) involved you could block them out I guess, the same way you block out 540 and 976. I can't imagine they would just leave them scattered around all over the place leaving PBX administrators helpless. Or would they? PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: Bar-Ilan University Computing Center, Israel Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 10:38:01 IST From: Hank Nussbacher Subject: Online Phone Book Wanted I need to backtrack a few phone numbers in the 914 and 718 area codes. a) Is there a system on the Web that will allow me to code in a phone number and get back the person's name and address? b) If the answer to (a) is no, I remember hearing of a CD that contained this information and that allowed searching. Where can I get such a CD? If someone has it -- would they be willing to do a few quick searches for me as a favor? Thanks, Hank ------------------------------ From: jken1485@uriacc.uri.edu (John Kennedy) Subject: Looking For Telecommuting Data Date: 6 Nov 1995 06:42:16 GMT I am a graduate student at the University of Rhode Island doing some research on telecommuting. I am trying to build a regression model to predict business usage of telecommuting. I have been searchng (to absolutely no avail) for either state by state numbers of telecommuters (cross sectional) or monthly for the last 4 years (time series)for the whole US. Is there anyone out there who can help me locate some of this info? I would appreciate it greatly. ------------------------------ From: hkmaddal@mail.delcoelect.com (Hari K. Maddali) Subject: Redirect/Forward Incoming Calls Date: 7 Nov 1995 22:03:08 GMT Organization: Delco Electronics Corp. Is it possible to "Re-Direct / Forward" incoming calls? If so, how and what is needed for say two incoming and two outgoing simultaneous call processing? Can we use a PC database to lookup, match and dial a forwarding phone number for an incoming call? Can we collect call traffic information and other statistics such as connect time, idle time, caller ID etc? What's an approximate cost $$$ for a system including software to handle four line traffic. I think the number of lines required depends on estimated call traffic and average length of each call. Is it cost effective to go through telco for some of these tasks if they can offer such services? Please advise. With so much tele-marketing fraud going on is it legal to have strictly a "Call Redirect / Forwarding" hub. Any information yuo have available on this will be very much appreciated. ------------------------------ From: doster@vax.telcores.com Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 14:00:09 -0600 Subject: Telecom Management Home Page TELECOM Digest readers may be interested in Telco Research's home page (it's 99.9% fluff-free). On it they will see: - articles about telemanagement - a glossary of telemanagement terms - telemanagement FAQs - hot-links to other telecom resources - industry "quotes" - product & company info (.01% fluff max.) - Spanish translation of products & services information The home page is updated monthly. More tutorials, articles, and hot-links will be added. Comments on our home page are welcomed. Our home page address is: http://www.telcores.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #470 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 7 22:16:03 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA13842; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 22:16:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 22:16:03 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511080316.WAA13842@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #471 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Nov 95 22:15:30 EST Volume 15 : Issue 471 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecommunications Bill Fails to Serve the Public Interest (Monty Solomon) Re: Telecom in China (Erez Levav) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Raymond Hazel) Big Brother - He's Everywhere (Lionel Ancelet) Re: Powering the Optical Network Interface (Richard Kenshalo) Re: GH337 and Mobile "Modem" (Juergen Wichmann) Suggested Reading on Telecom Revolution (Rick Whiting) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 23:42:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Telecommunications Bill Fails to Serve the Public Interest Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Forwarded FYI to the Digest: Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 11:10:23 -0800 From: Andy Oram Subject: Paper on telecom bill, adopted by CPSR We started talking about this paper (which grew out of my attempt to write a "Top 10" document) a few weeks ago on these mailing lists. CPSR has adopted and officially released this document. I hope members of these lists can spread it widely. Thanks for your encouragement and advice. Andy -------------------------------- U.S. Telecommunications Bill Fails to Serve the Public Interest 6 November 1995 A bill that will change the way we use telephones, television, and electronic networks is currently being considered by the U.S. Congress. The bill claims to promote industry growth, competition, and technological progress, but may well simply end up reducing diversity and public debate. It also sets precedents that we expect to be mirrored in other countries. So non-U.S. residents also have good reason to be concerned with the outcome of this bill. There are four major problems in the bill: 1. It allows oligopolies to form that control the information we receive on radio, television, newspapers, and electronic networks. 2. It allows gaps to widen between segments of society (rich and poor, educated and uneducated). 3. It censors public discussion on electronic networks. 4. It lets rates rise too fast and too much. This paper will examine each of these problems, after some introductory background. We may still have time to make significant changes. Why is the telecom bill important? Electronic media are not just another industry like shipping or manufacturing. They deal with the very stuff our minds are made of: the information we use to take political positions, the choices we have in educating ourselves, the cultural resources through which we define ourselves. The struggle over electronic media is a struggle for our thoughts and actions. Electronic media cover a range of giant industries, including radio, broadcast and cable TV, telephone companies, wireless communications and satellites, computer networks, and traditional news and publishing companies that are moving online. The category even touches on financial institutions and electrical utilities. The industries involved are eager to loosen restrictions on their behavior. They have poured large sums of money into influencing Congress, and lobbied intensively for the current versions of the bill: the Telecommunications Competition and Deregulation Act of 1995 in the Senate (S. 652) and the Communications Act of 1995 in the House (H.R. 1555). Unfortunately for the public, in removing these restrictions the telecom bill also removes historic protection for diversity of opinion and reasonable rates. The intent of the bill The stated purpose of telecom reform is to increase technology in homes and institutions. While we definitely support an expansion of electronic networking (the information infrastructure or information superhighway, as it is often called) we ask, "What will it be used for?" Many broadcasting and telecommunications companies seem to view their customers purely as consumers of entertainment or information. But we want individuals and institutions to generate content as well as receive it. We want to see advances in telecom improve public debate on important issues, provide a wealth of culture, and increase our links with one another. If Congress takes its role seriously in managing communications as a public resource, industry growth is quite compatible with universal service and providing an infrastructure for democracy. But currently, we see this bill restricting options and opportunities. Let us look at the problems. Problem 1. The bill allows oligopolies to form that control the information we receive on radio, television, newspapers, and electronic networks. The wave of highly-publicized mergers (along with less sensational but still important takeovers) that have reduced the number of people in control of broadcasting will continue after this bill is passed. Although the bill prohibits mergers between telephone companies and cable TV companies, the House version contains many exceptions, waivers, and exemptions that erode this protection against monopolies. For instance, mergers are permitted in communities with less than 50,000 population, and the two types of company are permitted to share some transmission facilities. Local telephone companies are allowed to enter the long-distance market too soon, before competition is likely to enter their traditional local market. Local telephone users may end up bearing the costs of expansion. The bill allows cooperation between companies that should be competitors, assuming that abuses will be stopped by anti-trust laws that are not adequate or appropriate for this kind of oversight. In a direct blow to diversity, the bill raises the percentage of national audience that a single person or company can reach from 25% to 35%. A larger foreign ownership of broadcast media is also permitted. Limits are removed on the number of radio stations that an individual can own. The bill makes it easier for broadcasters to keep their licenses indefinitely, without the hearings that are currently held. Finally, it gives existing broadcasters a large amount of unused television spectrum, instead of opening up the spectrum in an auction. Problem 2. The bill allows gaps to widen between segments of society (rich and poor, educated and uneducated). The 1934 communications act guaranteed universal service, meaning that everyone in the country could get telephone service at reasonable rates. The new bill contains protections for rural areas and the disabled, but leaves loopholes in the universal service guarantee. Some of the advanced information services could well become available only to affluent people or to institutions in privileged areas. Moreover, while there are some sections supporting access for schools and public agencies, these are vague and need stronger guarantees. Public libraries, the traditional place where all members of the public can get information, are given special rates in the Senate bill but not the House. Problem 3. The bill censors public discussion on electronic networks. Both houses of Congress have inserted sections in the bill criminalizing a broad range of information under the claim that it harms children. These clauses of the bill, while supposedly aimed at pornography, have such vague language ("indecency" and "sexual or excretory activities") that they could be used to censor literary classics and public health information. Given the open nature of networks such as the Internet, restrictions on sending material that children might look at ends up keeping everyone from speaking freely. The fear of being caught in the law's net will force many networks to shut down. Thus, the free flow of views we now have on the information highway could be replaced by a controlled set of ideas dished out by corporate broadcasters and monitored by prosecutors all over the country. By approving censorship, the Senate rejected a petition signed by 107,000 Internet users. The House voted overwhelmingly to reject government censorship, but sections imposing it were inserted into the bill almost at the last minute as part of a complicated amendment. We do not dismiss the concerns of parents who want to shield their children from inappropriate material. The whole point is that each parent defines what is "inappropriate" differently. There are more flexible and effective ways to screen what children see, than to have the government impose censorship on everybody. Problem 4. The bill lets rates rise too fast and too much. Cable TV rates for upper tier services (those offered for extra cost) are deregulated in the bill before there is adequate assurance of competition to keep the rates down. Cable operators are also effectively allowed to deregulate any services they choose by moving them from the basic tier to the upper tier. This would reverse the consumer protections passed in 1992. In other media, states can let rates for services rise with little justification. Both the Department of Justice and the FCC are severely restricted in their traditional powers to review competition and rates. As mentioned under Problem 2, rates are not regulated for advanced information services. These services could end up costing far more than necessary, just as cable TV companies now charge premiums for popular channels. Loopholes allow companies that own media (cables and phone lines) to charge artificially high rates to others who wish to lease them, or restrict the people leasing them to ineffective competitors. What we want Our communications channels are a public resource. As the telecom bill prepares to go into conference committee, we call on Congress to safeguard the public interest. * Promote diversity of programming by requiring carriers to provide services to other companies at reasonable rates. * Protect the free marketplace of ideas by preventing yet larger media monopolies and oligopolies. Keep regulatory safeguards in place until proof of true competition emerges. If telephone companies and cable companies merge in sparsely-populated areas that lack competition, continue price regulation. * Do not raise the limits on the percentage of markets owned by one firm or on foreign ownership. * Keep the requirements for interconnection and interoperability (the ability of different services to use each others lines and identical protocols) so that users anywhere can reach each other. Ensure that users can keep telephone numbers when switching companies. * Reject censorship, which is a big step backward and is totally unacceptable. Leave it up to parents make their own choices. Strip out the provisions on "Obscene or harassing use" and "Protection of Minors." * Ensure equitable access by all segments of the population, including rural areas, low-income areas, and the disabled. Make the Federal-State Joint Board overseeing universal service a permanent institution. * Maintain reasonable rates for enhanced cable services as well as basic service, either through robust competition or through continued regulation. * Make telephone companies return to consumers some of the savings achieved through greater efficiencies. * Preserve preferential access for public, education, and government organizations. * In exchange for the extra television spectrum that broadcasters can profit from, require extra services such as public interest programming or more diversity in programming. What to do now Legislators have to hear from you. They need to know that this bill will not slide quietly through Congress, but that the eyes of the public are on them. Write to your own legislators, to the people on the joint committee, and to President Clinton. Make the points listed in the "What we want" section of this paper. If the bill is not substantially changed in the right direction, write to President Clinton and ask for a veto. Familiarize yourself with how your representatives voted, and tell your friends and colleagues about it. Let them know that this bill will affect them, and ask them to write too. Contact your local newspaper and ask them to cover the bill. Key legislators These are the Senators and Representatives on the conference committee that is merging the Senate and House telecom bills. If you live in one of their states, write to the legislator and strongly indicate that censorship is unconstitutional and will be ineffective in protecting children. Also write to Senator Robert Dole and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, who have a great deal of power to influence the committee, and to President Clinton, who has said he might veto the bill. Senate: Conrad Burns (R, Montana) J. James Exon (D, Nebraska) Wendell Ford (D, Kentucky) Slade Gorton (R, Washington) Ernest Hollings (D, South Carolina) Daniel Inouye (D, Hawaii) Trent Lott (R, Mississippi) John McCain (R, Arizona) Larry Pressler (R, South Dakota) John D. Rockefeller IV (D, West Virginia) Ted Stevens (R, Alaska) House: Bob Barr (R, Georgia) Joe Barton (R, Texas) Howard L. Berman (D, California) Thomas J. Bliley (R, Virginia) Rick Boucher (D, Virginia) Sherrod Brown (D, Ohio) John Bryant (D, Texas) Steve E. Buyer (R, Indiana) John Conyers (D, Michigan) John D. Dingell (D, Michigan) Anna G. Eshoo (D, California) Jack Fields (R, Texas) Michael Flanagan (R, Illinois) Daniel Frisa (R, New York) Elton Gallegly (R, California) Bob Goodlatte (R, Virginia) Bart Gordon (D, Tennessee) J. Dennis Hastert (R, Illlinois) Martin Hoke (R, Ohio) Henry Hyde (R, Illinois) Sheila Jackson-Lee (D, Texas) Scott L. Klug (R, Wisconsin) Blanche Lambert Lincoln (D, Arkansas) Edward Markey (D, Massachusetts) Carlos J. Moorehead (R, California) Mike Oxley (R, Ohio) Bill Paxon (R, New York) Bobby L. Rush (D, Illinois) Robert Scott (D, Virginia) Dan Schaefer (R, Colorado) Patricia Schroeder (D, Colorado) Cliff Stearns (R, Florida) Rick White (R, Washington) For more information If you are not online, information is hard to get. The traditional media find this issue boring, so they don't report on it. Write your local radio stations and newspapers and tell them the bill has serious consequences for the public and should be covered. One fine article in print is "The Robber Barons of the Information Highway" by Joshua Wolf Shenk, which appeared in the Washington Monthly in June 1995. If you are online, you can read some World Wide Web pages and join several mailing lists that distribute information and discuss the telecom bill. To get on one of the lists below, send mail to the address shown and include the information in the required format. Capitalized words should be written exactly as shown here; lowercase words should be replaced with your full name. Cyber Rights--discussion of civil liberties and rights on electronic networks. mail to: LISTSERV@CPSR.ORG Put in body of message: SUBSCRIBE CYBER-RIGHTS your name Telecommunications Policy Roundtable Forum--discussion of telecommunications issues from a public-interest standpoint. mail to: LISTPROC@CNI.ORG Put in body of message: SUBSCRIBE ROUNDTABLE your name Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) Billwatch--announcements about bills and actions to take. mail to: LISTPROC@VTW.ORG Put in Subject line of message: SUBSCRIBE VTW-ANNOUNCE your name Telecomreg--discussion of technical, legal, and policy issues in telecommunications. mail to: LISTSERVER@RELAY.DOIT.WISC.EDU Put in body of message: SUBSCRIBE TELECOMREG your name com-priv--discussion about commercial use of the Internet. mail to: com-priv-request@lists.psi.com Request to be added to the mailing list (mail is read by a person) The Center for Media Education offers a Web page about the bill at: http://www.access.digex.net/~cme/bill.html The CPSR Cyber Rights group provides several documents on our ftp site. Look particularly at ACLU-Censorship-Challenge, AllComMed-PEG-campaign, Clinton-Telecom-Position, Cox-Wyden-Protection, Shenk-Telecommunications-Bills, Telecom-Post-on-Bills, and Valovic-re-Telecommunications-Bill. ftp://jasper.ora.com/pub/andyo/cyber-rights/CYBER-RIGHTS/Re-Legislation The Benton Foundation maintains a general page about the bill at: http://cdinet.com/cgi-bin/lite/Benton/Goingon/HR1555.html and other pages about one issue, TV spectrum allocation, at: http://www.cdinet.com/benton/Catalog/Working13/working13.html http://cdinet.com/cgi-bin/lite/Benton/Goingon/spectrumalloc.html The Clinton administration has placed statements on the bill at: http://ntiaunix2.ntia.doc.gov:70/0/congress/1555sap.html http://ntiaunix2.ntia.doc.gov:70/0/congress/s652pos.txt http://ntiaunix2.ntia.doc.gov:70/0/congress/lis652.txt Analyses from Ralph Nader and the Consumer Project on Technology are at: http://www.essential.org/cpt/telecom/telecom.html The Campaign for Broadcast Competition offers a page about TV spectrum allocation at: http://campaign.com/ Many organizations and individuals have Web pages about censorship; one up-to-date page at the time of this writing is: http://jasper.ora.com/andyo/cyber-rights/free-speech Industry has not had much to say online about the bill. Two opposing viewpoints from Regional Bell Operating Companies and LDDS WorldCom, a long-distance telephone company: http://www.bell.com/1025.html http://www.iquest.net/cgi-bin/gate2?|33cC9kkP://WWW.WgykEy.COM/ COlPOltk/PlEeelEy.9kMy3x3SMKkG The Center for Media Education has made several fine analyses of the bill available by electronic mail. Write to bill@cme.org and put one of the following words in the subject line to get a position papers on the subject shown: alert call to action with summaries of issues clinton President's critique of House bill own industry concentration rates rates, industry concentration, related issues spectrum spectrum give-away update frequently-changing news Redistributing this document This paper may be freely distributed if kept in its entirety. A special short version is available which lacks contact information for legislators and pointers to further information. (The short version is intended for distribution to the media and political figures.) You can obtain the paper as a text file (so you can email it to friends or post it on appropriate bulletin boards and newsgroups) and as a PostScript file (so you can print and distribute it in hard-copy form). Contact Andy Oram at cr-owner@cpsr.org or 617-641-1261 (during U.S. East Coast business hours) to obtain either of these formats. On the Web, the paper is at: http://jasper.ora.com/andyo/cyber-rights/telecom.html This paper was written by Andy Oram with help from members of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility and other people in the public interest community. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility has been in educating the public and the government for 12 years in the socially safe and beneficial use of computers and related technologies. Special thanks goes to Craig Johnson of Transnational Data Reporting Service, Inc. for his expert analysis of the bill. Copyright is held by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. ------------------------------ From: levav@yulara.fccc.edu (Erez Levav) Subject: Re: Telecom in China Date: 7 Nov 1995 22:47:45 GMT Organization: Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA Reply-To: levav@yulara.rm.fccc.edu (Erez Levav) In article , JohnWPan@aol.com writes: > ADECKER@bear.com (Andrew Decker) wrote: >> While the details vary depending upon the sector (and to some extent >> the report), in general, the Government is attempting to increase the >> aggregate number of access lines by 10+ million per year (essentially >> building an RBOC every year!). > Depending on who you talk to, the telephone penetration in China is one > to five percent, with big cities like Beijing and Shanghai reaching as > high as 30%. Now if the government wants to increase penetration by one > percent per year for the next ten years. That's one RBOC per year. It > is not going to happen. > The information presented here comes from newspaper articles, personal > visits, and recent reports from visitors from China. Disputes welcome. [this is not a dispute, just additional info] One of the biggest problems of adding new infrastructure is that the cities are overpopulated -- and thus extremly dense -- there is just not enough room to dig for the cables. Add to that that it is ALL done by manual labor, and the low level of motivation (at the worker level), and the picture gets uglier. The "solution" is (as indicated) cell-phones. One has to have a cell-phone to be someone. In restaurants, the most frequent noise is the ringing of the cell-phones (followed by the matches striken to light cigarettes ;). A different problem is long distance calls. Again, connectivity is just not there. I would assume that the best way to connect is microwave towers, but here the reverse of the city case -- most places are very hard to reach (physically), roads are overloaded and in terrible shape. We had a truck carrying computer equipment "lost" en route from Beijing to Shanghai for almost a week -- it broke down and the driver had no way of calling ... All of my information is from my travel to China -- very personal view. Erez Levav Fox Chase Cancer Center E_Levav@fccc.edu 7701 Burholme Avenue (215) 728-3160 Philadelphia, PA 19111 ATT: 0-700-2xpress 0-700-2101010 (FAX) ------------------------------ From: razel@unet.net.com (Raymond Hazel) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: Tue, 07 Nov 1995 16:14:45 -0800 Organization: N.E.T. In article , john dupont wrote: >> Research by the Yankee Group shows that 69 percent of cellular users >> think about the cost of a cellular call every time they pick up their >> cellular phone. Also, 78 percent of cellular users say they would >> encourage people to call them if they didn't have to pay for receiving >> the calls. > I wonder if the research has determined how many of those people > encouraged to call will resent being stuck with the bill. I would. > Cellular users who choose this option may notice a drop in incoming > calls rather that a rise. I found that USWest has installed a "caller pays" service for cellular service when programming the local dialing table in Tucson. I don't remember the prefix, or if there was more than one, but in essence, the subscriber of the cellular service chose who paid the airtime when requesting service. Then the number was set up for seven digit (local) if the subscriber paid air time, and 1 + seven digit if the caller paid. No message was given prior to call completion. Initially, it was confusing whether to program the PBX for 1+. It ended up that the programming required seven digit screening (orginal instructions were to avoid the client having to redial calls because of 1+ requirements); it ended up that caller-paid-air-time calls were blocked. I don't know how ten digit calls were handled. I've always wondered, though. ------------------------------ From: la@well.com (Lionel Ancelet) Subject: Big Brother - He's Everywhere! Reply-To: la@well.com Organization: The Well Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 16:37:55 GMT mkuras@ccs.neu.edu (Michael J Kuras) wrote: > DEJANEWS SPARKS PRIVACY CONCERNS Even "better" (depends on your viewpoint) is the Standford Filtering Service. It is actually an agent that you can setup to monitor thousands of newsgroup for the occurence of certain words. Whenever these words appear, you get an email (not an email for every occurence, though: you can chose to receive an email every day, every N days). The URL is http://woodstock.stanford.edu:2000/ Regarding these services ... yes they can be used to invade privacy, but our postings are public, aren't they? Hopefully it will make posters a little bit more responsible about contents Lionel [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I happen to think that DejaNews is an excellent service. It is an idea whose time has definitly come. In this time of newsgroup babble -- thousands of news groups, and no way possible for any one person to begin to review them all or even a small percentage of them -- a service like DejaNews or Standford Filtering provide an excellent way to summarize and analyze what is going on here. Oh, I know the privacy freaks are screaming about it, but thier logic in doing so defies reason. People complain a lot about others who get into their affairs, and yet, this is nothing new. All that has changed in the past few years is the *ease* with which we can learn what is going on around us. Since the beginning of Usenet, we were free to read the messages, respond to them and discuss them. Now along comes a service which says in effect it has become too unweildy and cumbersome to attempt to read all the messages, respond to them and discuss them, so we will help you with it. Now all of a sudden it becomes an invasion of privacy? If something is not otherwise an invasion of privacy because my eyes see it or my ears hear it, then it should seem very reasonable that it does not become an invasion of privacy merely due to the use of 'extension eyes' or 'extension ears'. If it is legal and not otherwise an invasion of privacy for me to observe or hear something, make handwritten notes on the same and discuss it, then by extension it is perfectly okay to use a camera (artificial eyes) or a recording device (artificial ears) or a computer (an enhanced method of note- taking) for the same purposes. Because in the past it was not nearly so easy to accumulate information, a lot of people simply did not know you *could* collect the information. Those who did know, were not that concerned. Now that information is flowing rapidly in all directions and frequently overflowing, here come lots of people screaming about how their privacy is being violated. No such thing is happening. *You* create records about yourself; all the rest of us have done is invent easy ways of finding it. Take the word of someone who spent the first thirty years or so of his life in the pre-computer era. The first couple of *large* companies I worked for back in the 1960's did not have a computer in sight. Instead they had row after row after row after row of filing cabinets and thousands of employees who did nothing but take things in and out of the filing cabinets all day and pass them along. The same information we have now was available back then but we had to go look *hard* to find it. The same companies had thousands of people employed as 'bookkeepers' manually preparing invoices and balancing accounts, etc. So privacy freaks, your complaint is with the *computer*, not with the keepers of the records or those of us who seek them out. Possibly the most damnable invention of the twentieth century, the computer is not just our best friend; I'm afraid it is also our worst enemy. It works along nicely with you at whatever you want to accomplish, but then it snitches on you to others. I think those of us who are 'getting on in years' who remember the 'old system' very well and yet have actively embraced the 'new ways' are very privileged in one sense. We know how things used to be; we can clearly deliniate things in our own mind and see both the good and the harm that have come from computers. I can see where the privacy freaks are coming from; indeed, years ago security through obscurity worked just fine because there was so much of it. They are angry that now-a-days you have to actually work hard at it to stay private. They would have hated the 'press clipping' services from years ago. What are press clipping services you ask? Well years ago when there were twice as many newspapers in the USA as there are now, and no computers to 'grep' through the text looking for stuff, people like politicians and successful business executives were still interested in knowing what the press said about them. So an entire industry over a period of about a hundred years from the middle 1800's through about 1970 was built around the clipping services. Most services employed anywhere from a dozen to two dozen people whose job consisted of sitting around reading newspapers all day long. They each had a list of clients they read for, looking for any and all mentions of that client in the daily newspapers. When they found an article about one of their clients or a mention of their client by name they would cut the article out of the paper and send it to him. Usually they charged something like 25 cents for each item found. A large clipping service would get a dozen copies of each newspaper in their region each day, and usually a dozen or so copies each day of the national papers such as the {New York Times}, the {Wall Street Journal}, the {Christian Science Monitor}, etc. Readers were paid by the number of items they found, and they read *closely* and *rapidly* through all the papers. Politicians were fond of using press clipping services to collect data on what their opponents had been saying so they could compile it all and use it against their opponents. You see, as the scripture tells us, there is nothing new under the sun. Just new ways of doing it is all ... so blame the computer for your problems, guys. The computer managed to put the press clipping services out of business -- or at least radically rearrange how they do business -- just as the computer put the answering services out of business. Praise computers! Damn computers! PAT] ------------------------------ From: kenshalo@anc.ak.net Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 12:19:11 -0900 Subject: Re: Powering the Optical Network I too, am interested in options for powering the optical network. Some of the issues that need to be addressed are: Tariff issues for class of service such as tier costs for power fail-safe lines vs. non-fail-safe lines. What technical options exist for fail-safe vs. non-fail-safe lines. What technical options exist for bulk power vs. distributed power. When CPE is used for disaster relief/emergency services, how does the Telco guarantee provision of these services, if CPE powered. ----------- I am in the process of collecting various references concerning powering the optical network. One solution is to run fiber to the nodes where reliable back-up power can be provided (bulk power) and then go the short distances to the actual user on copper or coax using conventional loop powering technologies for those media. Let me know and I can send a list of references I have collected. I am very interested in this topic, and any solutions users have provided for their public and private networks, particularly for critical need networks such as disaster relief and emergency services. Richard Kenshalo ------------------------------ From: juergen.wichmann@Hamburg.Netsurf.DE (Juergen Wichmann) Subject: Re: GH337 and Mobile "Modem" Date: Tue, 07 Nov 1995 08:22:15 GMT Organization: Dr. Neuhaus Telekommunikation GmbH Antnio Sousa wrote: > I've recently seen a post referring that the DC12 "modem" that fits > with Ericsson's GH337 only works at 2400? Its not the DC12 card which limits to 2400bps but the GH337, that's correct. Next phone generation will do 9600. Juergen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 17:35:02 -0600 From: rwhiting@winternet.com (Rick Whiting) Subject: Suggested Reading on Telecom Revolution There is some good reading on the future of telecommunications in the following peridicals: The Economist, Vol. 336, No. 7934 (Sept. 30, 1995): "The Revolution Begins, At Last," pp. 15-16, and especially, "Telecommunications, The Death of Distance," pp. SURVEY 1-28. National Geographic, Vol. 188, No. 4 (October 1995): "Information Revolution," pp. 5-37. I thought I'd mention it because these aren't the periodicals in which one expects to find good telecommunications-related articles. Richard A. (Rick) Whiting Phone: + 1 612 550 1213 5780 Rosewood Ln. N. E-mail: rwhiting@winternet.com Plymouth, MN 55442-1411 Packet: W0TN @ WB0GDB.MN.USA.NOAM U.S.A. Fax: Number on request ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #471 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 8 00:34:15 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA24102; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 00:34:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 00:34:15 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511080534.AAA24102@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #472 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Nov 95 00:34:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 472 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Searching For Unix->Alpha Pager (Michael Coxe) Re: Limits to Redialing? (Ed Ellers) Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Steve Cogorno) Private Line No. 7 Finally Online; No. 8 Free on Request (Tom Farley) Obituary: Harry F. Tubergen (TELECOM Digest Editor) Let's Get That Address Changed Now! (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:53:12 -0800 From: michael@hal.com (Michael Coxe) Subject: Re: Searching for Unix->Alpha Pager In article 6@massis.lcs.mit.edu, albre011@maroon.tc.umn.edu (Bruce Albrecht) writes: > I am looking for Unix sources to send messages to an alphanumeric > pager. I've been told that there was one posted a while back, perhaps > to alt.sources. Does anyone know a location for this, or an > approximate posting date? For that matter, are the ixo files in the > telecom-archives/technical directory adequate for writing one from > scratch? An excellent stating point for pagin info on the WEB is the Airnote Web site: http://www.airnote.net To go directly to the paging software info, try: http://www.airnote.net/ww/paging.html#software And Here's some info from the paging FAQ: IXO Mailing List FAQ This FAQ is posted monthly to the IXO mailing list at ixo@plts.org. It is a compilation of answers to what we hope are the most frequently asked questions on the list. Some care has been put into the compilation of these answers but no warranty is given as to their accuracy or usefulness. This is version 1.2beta of this FAQ produced 7 June 95. The latest copy of this FAQ is available as: ftp://ftp.airnote.net/pub/paging-info/ixo.faq -- Brian Coogan bcoogan@kryten.telecom.com.au Section 2 Paging programs 2.1 Tpage Tpage was one of the earliest available paging programs using the TAP protocol. Originally developed and maintained by Tom Limoncelli (and copyright by him), it is probably the most widely used implementation as it is relatively simple. Tom passed the maintenance of tpage to the net some time ago and it was maintained for a while by Gary L Schaps [gls@cirrus.com] who produced v2.40. Gary has had to move on to other things and tpage has not really acquired a new parent since. For a summary of tpage features, see the excerpt from the package README below. Tpage is also called 'ixobeeper' now and then. Note: Tpage requires Perl 4.036 to run (it will not work with Perl 5.0! [yet]). The latest version of tpage available [as of June 1995] is version 2.40. 2.40 is known to have some bugs. Tpage 2.0/2.1 were in fairly wide use before 2.40. Archive sites: ftp://ftp.geo.mtu.edu/pub/ixo/{README.tpage,tpage-2.40.tar.gz} ftp://cirrus.com/pub/tpage/tpage2.4.tar.Z Known 2.4 bugs: getpacket() doesn't cope with text responses any more problems with modem locking under HP-UX and others As I remember, there was no Makefile provided prior to 2.1 - it is mentioned in the documentation somewhere but is not required for compilation (generally, "make ixocico" worked anyway). Excerpted from the README: "tpage" or "Tom's Pager System" is a set of programs that let you send messages to alpha-numeric pagers using the "IXO" protocol. It can also talk to numeric-only pagers using touch-tones. It supports a dialing directory, a "who's on duty now" schedule, and can do special tricks with RFC822-format email. The system has the following features: ...sends pages to any pager system that supports the IXO protocol or can be accessed with via a touch-tone phone. ...additional protocols can be added. ...can parse email messages and extract the interesting info from them resulting in shorter messages. ...can copy it's input to stdout and therefore can be used as a "tee". ...maintains a directory of people's phone numbers/PINs. ...can page "the person on duty" (searches a schedule). ...schedule can have slots that are empty, but find someone anyway if the message is marked "urgent". ...with programs like procmail, permits you to send certain email messages to your pager. ...a list of modems can be given to the daemon. 2.2 Sendpage Sendpage was written by Mark A. Fullmer of OSU [maf+@osu.edu] and is currently actively being maintained by him. Sendpage is written entirely in C and does not require perl. Sendpage seems to be gaining popularity rapidly which is a good sign! It has a great set of aliases and has much more flexible paging definitions. The latest version is Sendpage v4 alpha. See separate FAQ entry on that release. Available from: ftp://ftp.net.ohio-state.edu/pub/pagers/sendpage3a.tar.gz ftp://ftp.net.ohio-state.edu/pub/pagers/sendpage4a.tar.gz (latest) Taken from the sendpage README: $Id: README,v 1.3 1995/05/24 00:59:30 maf Exp $ Disk based message queue Each message is first queue'd to disk, and then picked up for delivery. Failed deliveries are retried. A list queue option is included. Built in aliases support multiple recipients indirect files programs may be run to list recipients Multiple pages can be sent per phone call to paging central. So if a page is sent to "x" and "y", and both "x" and "y" are resolve to the same paging central, only one phone call will be made to send the page. Built in Modem dialer Works with sendmail Adding a few lines to your sendmail.cf will allow an e-mail interface to sendpage. Instructions included to implement "alias@page.xxx.edu" or "id.pagingcentral@page.xxx.edu" style interface. E-mail notification A mail message is sent on all successful pages, and on the first failure. Speaks the PET (aka TAP/IXO) protocol Implemented from "Programmers Guide To Paging Data Interface Modules" by Motorola (12/88). Written in C. Being actively developed and maintained. Con: no manual pages or documentation exist (yet). [volunteers??] [Ed note: this list of features was taken from the sendpage documentation; I suspect it leaves out rather a lot of features] 2.3 Sendpage latest version Alpha 4 of sendpage is available from URL: ftp://ftp.net.ohio-state.edu/pub/pagers/sendpage4a.tar.gz This is portability and bug fixes only, as previously I can only test this fully under SunOS. I did compile and test up to trying to connect to paging central on HP/UX, IRIX, and Solaris though. from the changelog: workaround for syslog() and report() static buffers. - report() uses a 4K buffer (same as syslog) - all calls to report with unknown size strings use %.512s instead of %s config.c: pcinfo.modeminit not terminated properly - daryl@tcomeng.com signal.c: added POSIX_SIGNALS code. Use sigaction() for signal() instead of signal(). merged most of the AIX patches from daryl@tcomeng.com & mark@tcomeng.com sendpage.h can control a little more of the modem hardware setup -- specifically the DTR toggle for hangup and RTS/CTS flow control. merged in HP/UX patches from Mike Lutz & Heath Kehoe @ norand.com minor changes to compile under IRIX -- untested. added Solaris compatibility -- untested. fixed race condition in queue.c which would result in a spurious warning message about not being able to unlink() a queue file. -- ["Mark A. Fullmer" 23 May 95] 2.4 Other Free IXO/TAP/PET paging programs: This list is by no means complete; it just consists of a quick collation of what I could find mentioned in ixo over the last 6 months. [Authors: please consider yourself invited to contribute comments on your package and the particular features and benefits it offers! Please also correct any mistakes!] HylaFax: "You might want to look at HylaFAX v3.0pl0; it comes with IXO support and was intended to handle broadcast-style work of this sort (though it does not batch jobs like Mark Fullmer's sendpage software). You can find all the information about HylaFAX at http://www.vix.com/hylafax/." HylaFax is written in C++ and is a large system that also provides Fax support. Pros: robust job scheduler and great modem independence. Con: C++, IXO/TAP support is only a small part of HylaFax. [Sam Leffler 13 Mar 95] QuickPage: QuickPage is available from ftp://ftp.cts.mtu.edu/pub/QuickPage [Thomas Dwyer III 31 May 95] EasyPage: Thanks to Cam Clarke, my program EASY PAGE is now posted on airnote.net for FTP. My thanks to everyone on the list for helping me getting it running. Try it and if you want a registered copy (free) send me an email. I would also appreciate any comments you have regarding the program. [mike.willis@dibbs.com (Mike Willis) 9 Mar 95] AlphaPage: [No known ftp site available for this as yet] It is a telnet'able perl daemon (alphapaged). Unix clients need "alphapage" and expect. Or they can telnet in. PCs can telnet in. You can delete jobs from the queue, suspend jobs, list, etc. There is no security. [written by Bill Houle; 8 Feb 95] LPD solution: Uses lpd to ensure pages arrive in order and to handle client server aspects. Sits on top of tpage. Possibly still available AS-IS to anyone wanting it from Doug. (works for SunOS 4.1.3) [Doug Neuhauser 8 Feb 95] [See also the commercial solutions below] 2.5 Commercial solutions FirstPAGE: Check with a company called NETCON Technologies in Canada they have a platform independent IXO solution. It's called FirstPAGE and is in BETA now. (519) 858-5160 is their number. [20 Jan 95 Scott Burns] EtherPage(TM): (originally called PageMe) EtherPage(TM) HP-UX Beta Test Announcement "If you would like to beta test our EtherPage(TM) alphanumeric paging software, version 2.0 for HP, please send email to sales@ppt.com. You will need an HP series 700 workstation running HP-UX 9.0.x, an unused serial port, a hayes compatable modem, and a dedicated phone line to participate in the beta test." [David R Coelho 9 Apr 95] The sales@ppt.com people are very helpful and will send info on request. Check out the Motorola Third Party Referral Guide for a comprehensive list of paging application vendors, and it's free! The guide is being converted to html (www.mot.com), or, call 800-542-7882 for a hard copy. The list includes freeware and commercial app's. Tom Limoncelli has collated unedited information about some commercial packages [currently 4: BeepTool, PageMe(EtherPage), Notable, TelAlert]. This information is held in a file on plts.org which can be retrieved from Majordomo via a message of the form: mail majordomo@plts.org <, PAT said: > No dummies, the people at telco, they saw an increasing number of users in > the 1970's using 'call extenders' to route calls to other numbers, so they > gave us call forwarding. They saw people purchasing external speed dial > devices (or getting phones with the same built in) and they gave us speed > dialing. Those were in trial in the Bell System's ESS offices in the 1960s -- first in Morris (1960-62), then in Succasunna (the first commercial 1ESS, cut over in 1965) and Los Angeles (the second 1ESS, in 1966). I don't know when the Custom Calling services went commercial, but it was almost certainly in the late 1960s in the few ESSs then in service. (A side note: I was told by an AT&T person on comp.dcom.telecom.tech a few months ago that the Succasunna 1ESS was replaced with a 5ESS a couple years ago. That switch was designed to last forty years in service; it remains to be seen if any 1ESSes will be in that long.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The first ESS in Chicago was on the near north side in the Chicago-Superior office in 1972. Then the downtown area was converted in a couple parts during 1974-75. It was installed throughout the city by 1983. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rec@goodnet.com (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Subject: Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed Organization: GoodNet Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 02:45:16 GMT > For more info, call 1-800-NORTEL or contact me. ^^^^^^ Did they run out of seven digit 800 numbers so they are assigning six digits?? :) Richard Eyre-Eagles, KJ7MU Tempe, Arizona [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Uh-oh! Well, that one got past me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 19:37:19 -0800 (PST) john dupont said: > I wonder if the research has determined how many of those people > encouraged to call will resent being stuck with the bill. I would. > Cellular users who choose this option may notice a drop in incoming > calls rather that a rise. I'd be pretty annoyed too. If someone wants me to call them on *their* cellular phone for *their* conveinence, then *they* should pay the airtime charges. This is just another headache for PBX administrators, since the caller can be charged for air-time at certain times and not at others. What I think will happen is hotels/schools/payphone will block off these cellular numbers altogether. Bell Atlantic should at least put this new "Feature" in its own prefix so "caller-pays" can be blocked without giving the rest of us "regular" cellular users a bad reputation for air-time rip-offs. Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: Tom Farley Subject: Private Line No. 7 Finally Online; No. 8 Free on Request Date: Tue, 7 Nov 95 21:51:37 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) The text of _private line_ No. 7 (July-August, 1995), is now up at the ETEXT archive at Michigan. Gopher over or FTP to take a look. _private line_ No. 8 continues to be free upon request. Send me a snail mail address and I will send it to you. Here's how to look up No. 7: Gopher or FTP to: etext.archive.umich.edu/pub/Zines/PrivateLine Another useful URL is: gopher://gopher.etext.org:70/11/Zines/PrivateLine The table of contents for the electronic version is as follows: I EDITORIAL PAGE II LETTERS III UPDATES AND CORRECTIONS Magazine List Text of Cloning Regulation 47 C.F.R. 22.919 Misc. Stuff IV. A QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE TO EIA/TIA STANDARDS V. CLASS OF SERVICE AND PAYPHONES VI. THE PAYPHONE CORNER VII. PAYPHONE STATISTICS VIII. OUTSIDE PLANT, PART 1 IX. A FEW THOUGHTS ON THE TELECOM DIGEST X. BOOK REVIEWS Old Time Telephones The Straight Scoop ISDN: A User's Guide To Services, Applications and Resources in California XI. DEBIT CARDS: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE XII. TELEPHONE REPAIR COLUMN XIII. CAPTIONS TO THE OUTSIDE PLANT ARTICLE _ private line_ is a hardcopy, alternative publication about the telephone system. The hardcopy of No. 7 contains over 30 photographs. Send me $5.00 and I will send you a copy. Subscriptions are $27.00 for six issues per year. My address is: private line 5150 Fair Oaks Blvd. #101-348 Carmichael, CA 95608 CA USA I don't take credit cards but I can bill you. Back issues are $5.00 apiece. E-mail me if you want a list of their table of contents. Corrections and comments are always welcome. Submissions are also encouraged. Voice is (916) 488-4231. My fax number is (916) 978-0810 and my e-mail address is privateline@delphi.com By-the-way, the November-December issue of _private line_ (No. 9) is now out. It contains a look at an AT&T cable station, an update to the Digital Telephony Bill, an index to volume 2 of _private line_, a review of Def Con III and an article on propagation basics of point to point microwave systems. Among other things. It's my best effort so far and it contains 17 photographs. September-October, the free sample issue, contains a long article introducing Canadian telecom. It also has an article on Outside Plant. The feature article was written by Damien Thorn on cellular test mode scanning. Its four parts are: Accessing Diagnostic Modes, Oki Test Mode Commands, Motorola Diagnostics, and a Motorola Test Mode Command Summary. Thank you! Tom Farley ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Obituary: Harry F. Tubergen Date: Tue, 07 Nov 1995 23:00:00 EST Harry F. Tubergen would not be well known to many of you, but he passed away at age 74 about a week ago. Mr. Tubergen was the person who brought computers into banking here in the Chicago area in 1966. Prior to about 1960 no banks anywhere had computers. All record keeping was done manually, by legions of bookeepers and clerks including customer statements, check sorting, loan and interest payments, etc. In the middle sixties, a couple of the larger banks in New York began using computers, and under Mr. Tubergen's leadership as president of Merchandise National Bank here in Chicago, that bank began installing a computer system in 1966. Two much, much larger banks here, First National Bank of Chicago and Continental National Bank of Chicago both held off with any plans to computerize their operations until they could evaluate the results of the 'new automated system' at the much smaller MNB. They both began computerization in 1968 after seeing how it would work in the other bank. In fact, most banks around the United States were watching the 'experiment' at Merchandise National Bank with much interest. Harry Tubergen's pioneering efforts to bring computers into banks led the way for banks around the USA to retire their armies of clerks and put their trust in machinery. To insure that indeed computers could handle the job correctly, MNB and most other banks ran parallel accounting systems for six months to a year. That is, they had the computer do it all while the clerks did it also in the traditional way, making sure the books balanced and the answers all came out the same. Tubergen was not without his critics in the industry and among the customers, many of whom (the customers) were frightened to death that the new invention would lose track of their money or other- wise cause them many hardships. As computers began to spread throughout the finance industry in the early sixties the banks began to notice what was going on, but they were reluctant to install computers of their own. For example, American Express and Diner's Club, the two 'grandfathers' in the credit card business, having begun in the early 1950's both began massive computerization of their credit card operations about 1960. Yes, Amex credit cards originally were entirely manual in their bookkeeping if you can imagine such a thing, as was Diners and the oil company cards. Bank of America began using computers in about 1962 primarily because of their new product 'BankAmericard' which of course today we know as Visa. But other than BoA, and a couple of the big east coast banks like Chase Manhattan, the other banks in the USA would have nothing to do with computers until they saw the success that Harry Tubergen had at Merchandise National Bank in Chicago. Tubergen started at the bank at age 30 as their controller in 1952. He became president in 1965 and retired in 1977. So the next time you have business with your bank, remember the man who essentially started modern banking as we know it back in 1966. PAT ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Let's Get That Address Changed Now! Date: Wed, 08 Nov 1995 00:15:00 EST This is just a reminder that if you still have not changed your address for the Digest you should do so today. I am still getting mail filtering in from eecs.nwu.edu, and would like to get all of you on the new address as soon as possible. Effective now, please send all TELECOM Digest/comp.dcom.telecom mail only to the address 'ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu'. If you are a news admin, please adjust the newsgroup pointers as well. Furthermore, the Telecom Archives is now ftp.lcs.mit.edu. Thank you. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #472 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 9 03:05:15 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id DAA02555; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 03:05:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 03:05:15 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511090805.DAA02555@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #473 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Nov 95 03:05:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 473 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson More 708/847/630 Split Details (David W. Tamkin) Book Review: "The Mosaic Handbook for the Macintosh" (Rob Slade) Seattle Phone Scam Solved (Jeremy Schertzinger) *67 Now Works in New Orleans! (Mark J. Cuccia) New Voice File Conversion Package-Press Release (btatro@iquest.com) Spies on the Net, or "The CIA Controls EUnet" (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: More 708/847/630 Split Details Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 17:08:20 CST These are the towns that will switch from 708 to 847 or 630 or stay in 708 in the 1996 area code splits in northeastern Illinois per http://www.ameritech.com/areacode/, proofread against Ameritech's printed brochure on the subject. Permissive dialing for the 708/847 split runs from January 20 through April 19. Permissive dialing for the 708/630 split runs from August 3 through November 29 and will overlap the transition for the 312/773 split, which is scheduled to begin in October, 1996. [On that sub- ject, on Monday the Illinois Commerce Commission hearing examiner re- commended the plan to keep Chicago Zone 1 in 312 and assign 773 to the rest of the current 312 to the full ICC board.] Cellular and pager numbers will not change area codes, though individual customers may decide to change numbers to get into a preferred area code. Some customers in towns marked with an asterisk will get new telephone numbers. I'll give details on border anomalies below. Municipalities retaining 708: Alsip, Bedford Park, Beecher, Bellwood, Berkeley, Berwyn, Blue Island, Bridgeview, Broadview, Brookfield, Burbank, Burnham, Calumet City, Calumet Park, Chicago Heights, Chicago Ridge, Cicero, Country Club Hills, Countryside, Crestwood, Crete, Dixmoor, Dolton, East Hazel Crest, Elmwood Park, Evergreen Park, Flossmoor, Ford Heights, Forest Park, Forest View, Glenwood, Goodenow, Harvey, Harwood Heights, Hazel Crest, Hickory Hills, Hillside, Hines, Hodgkins, Hometown, Homewood, Indian Head Park, Justice, La Grange, La Grange Park, Lansing, Lyn- wood, Lyons, Markham, Matteson, Maywood, McCook, Melrose Park, Merri- onette Park, Midlothian, Mokena, Monee, Norridge, North Riverside, Northlake, Oak Forest, Oak Lawn, Oak Park, Olympia Fields, Orland Hills, Orland Park, Palos Heights, Palos Hills, Palos Park, Park Forest, Peotone, Phoenix, Posen, Richton Park, River Forest, River Grove, Riverdale, Riverside, Robbins, Sauk Village, South Chicago Heights, South Holland, Steger, Stickney, Stone Park, Summit, Thorn- ton, Tinley Park, University Park, Westchester, Western Springs, Willow Springs, Worth Municipalities moving to 847: Algonquin, Antioch, Aptakisic, Arlington Heights, Bannockburn, Barrington, Barrington Hills, Beach Park, Biltmore, Buffalo Grove, Burlington, Carpentersville, Cary, Deer Park, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Diamond Lake, Downey, Dundee, East Dundee, Echo Lake, Elgin, Elk Grove Village*, Evanston, Forest Lake, Ft. Sheridan, Fox Lake, Fox Lake Hills, Fox River Grove, Fox River Valley Gardens, Franklin Park, Gages Lake, Gilberts, Gilmer, Glencoe, Glenview, Golf, Grandwood Park, Grass Lake, Grayslake, Great Lakes, Green Oaks, Gurnee, Hainesville, Half Day, Hampshire, Hawthorn Woods, Highland Park, Highwood, Hoffman Es- tates, Hubbard Woods, Huntley, Indian Creek, Ingleside, Inverness, Is- land Lake, Ivanhoe, Kenilworth, Kildeer, Lake Barrington, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Lake in the Hills, Lake Villa, Lake Zurich, Libertyville, Lincolnshire, Lincolnwood, Lindenhurst, Long Grove, Long Lake, Loon Lake, McGaw Park, Mettawa, Milburn, Morton Grove, Mt. Prospect, Mun- delein, Niles, North Barrington, North Chicago, Northbrook, North- field, Oakwood Hills, Old Mill Creek, Palatine, Park City, Park Ridge, Pingree Grove, Pistakee Highlands, Plato Center, Prarie View, Prospect Heights, Riverwoods, Rolling Meadows, Rondout, Rosecrans, Rosemont, Round Lake, Round Lake Beach, Round Lake Heights, Round Lake Park, Russell, Schaumburg*, Schiller Park, Silver Lake, Skokie, Sleepy Hol- low, South Barrington, South Elgin, Sylvan Lake, Techny, Third Lake, Timber Lake, Tower Lakes, Venetian Village, Vernon Hills, Wadsworth, Wauconda, Waukegan, West Dundee, Wheeling, Wildwood, Wilmette, Win- netka, Winthrop Harbor, Zion Municipalities moving to 630: Addison, Argonne, Aurora, Bartlett*, Batavia, Bensenville, Big Rock, Bloomingdale, Bolingbrook, Bristol, Burr Ridge*, Carol Stream, Clarendon Hills, Darien, Downers Grove, Elburn, Elmhurst, Eola, Geneva, Glen Ellyn, Glendale Heights, Hanover Park, Hinsdale, Itasca, Kaneville, Keeneyville, La Fox, Lemont, Lily Lake, Lisle, Lombard, Maple Park, Medinah, Montgomery, Mooseheart, Naperville, North Aurora, Oak Brook, Oakbrook Terrace, Ontarioville, Oswego, Plano, Roselle, St. Charles, Streamwood*, Sugar Grove, Villa Park, Virgil, Warrenville, Wasco, Wayne*, West Chicago, Westmont, Wheaton, Willowbrook, Winfield, Wood Dale, Woodridge, Yorkville Border anomalies: 630 will cover a single geographical area. 847 and the new 708 will each be divided into three discontiguous pieces. To keep all of incorporated Bartlett, Streamwood, and Wayne in 630, customers in the parts of those towns wired from the Elgin switch will get new phone numbers. To keep all of incorporated Schaumburg and Elk Grove Village in 847, customers in the parts of those towns wired from the Roselle switch or in the part of Schaumburg wired from the Bartlett switch will get new phone numbers. [Note that that's the Roselle _switch_, not the Ro- selle Exchange. Almost all of Schaumburg lies in the Roselle Exchange but is served from other central offices (Willowcrest, Schaumburg, and Schaumburg North) which will go entirely into 847.] To keep all of incorporated Burr Ridge in 630, customers in the part wired from the LaGrange switch will get new phone numbers. To prevent dividing Rosemont or assigning new phone numbers there, Franklin Park and Schiller Park will follow Rosemont into 847 instead of remaining in 708 as earlier maps showed. Much of the Franklin Park/River Grove border runs through the middles of blocks, so there will be yet more places where next-door neighbors will need to dial eleven digits to call one another. Norwood Heights will be divided; it is unincorporated, so there was no need to avoid splitting it. Ameritech phones there will stay in 708 (the prefixes in use in the eastern portion of Norwood Heights also serve Harwood Heights and those in the southwestern part also serve Norridge), but Centel-Illinois lines in the northwestern part are on Park Ridge prefixes and will go to 847. The Chicago-Newcastle and River Grove central offices will each serve pieces of three area codes: 847, 708, and 312 (to become 773). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Nov 1995 17:23:12 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Mosaic Handbook for the Macintosh" BKMOSAHM.RVW 951023 "The Mosaic Handbook for the Macintosh", Dougherty/Koman, 1994, 1-56592-096-1 %A Dale Dougherty dale@ora.com %A Richard Koman rkoman@ora.com %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1994 %G 1-56592-096-1 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O 800-998-9938, fax: 707-829-0104, nuts@ora.com, brian@ora.com %O rick.brown@onlinesys.com mary@ora.com %P 171 %T "The Mosaic Handbook for the Macintosh" Of the three titles in this series, this is the most general, and the least platform specific, but still provides one of the better overviews of Mosaic. The first four chapters are general explorations of the Internet, World Wide Web (WWW or W3), and the Global Network Navigator (GNN). Chapters five to seven give a great deal more detail than previous Internet guides on customization of Mosaic, multimedia extensions, and HTML (HyperText Markup Language). A final chapter looks at possible future directions, contacts, and resources. Appendices give reference guides to Mosaic and HTML. As with the Windows version, unfortuantely, there is almost no material on installation, or dialup IP accounts (or software) for the Mac. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1995 BKMOSAHM.RVW 951023 Vancouver roberts@decus.ca Institute for rslade@cln.etc.bc.ca Research into rslade@vanisl.decus.ca User Rob_Slade@mindlink.bc.ca Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 14:32:38 PST From: Jeremy Schertzinger Subject: Seattle Phone Scam Solved Two Seattle television stations, KOMO and KING were recently scammed by an artist calling and identifying himself as a US West representative. He said that US West was testing the lines and he needed access to a specific extension. That extension was the long distance lines of the two businesses. Over three days, he racked up hundreds if not thousands of dollars in long distance calls all over the world. (The stations would not comment on the amount of the bills.) After KOMO figured out what was going on, they tried to keep him on the line for awhile. He got nervous, hung up, and has not called back. In a later segment on KOMO News: US West says they can test their own lines without your help. If anyone ever calls claiming to be from the phone company and wanting to be transferred to a specific extension, they are probably not telco employees. Jeremy Schertzinger jeremyps@eskimo.com -- jeremys@scn.org -- jeremy@rdz.stjohns.edu Unofficial Rush Limbaugh Home Page http://www.eskimo.com/~jeremyps/rush/ The Best of Kidopedia -- http://rdz.stjohns.edu/kidopedia/ Seattle Community Network Teens Moderator telnet: scn.org "go teens" ------------------------------ From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: *67 Now Works in New Orleans! Date: 8 Nov 1995 22:36:06 GMT Organization: Tulane University *67, the Caller-ID number privacy prefix was never allowed in Louisiana. From the time 'Touchstar' (CLASS/CCS-7) features began to be introduced sometime in 1991, we were not allowed a per-call number blocking, nor was anyone allowed an option of default per-line number blocking. Only certain classes of customers (Police undercover, political animals, schoolteachers, YWCA/Battered Women's Centers, etc) were allowed to have a 'phony' phone number to be transmitted/displayed on their outgoing calls. Everytime I tried to dial 11-67 or enter *67, I always received one of two recordings. From #1AESS offices, I got "We're sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check your _instruction manual_ or call the _business office_ for assistance." From DMS offices, I got "We're sorry, you have dialed an invalid Touchstar option code" or something. similar. I don't know which recording the #5ESS offices used. Even without a per-line or per-call 'Private Call' option, some calls did show up as 'Private' on my ID box every now and then. They were calls comming from local PBX or ISDN systems, some of them with a US Governmental office. With the anticipated National/Interstate Caller-ID and the FCC mandates that per-call number blocking be made available, I was trying *67 (11-67) every several days. Only about a week ago I still received the recordings. Yesterday, I received my monthly bill from SCBell- excuse me- BellSouth. In it was an insert explaining that *67 (11-67) was now available, and that Caller-ID would soon be going Nationwide. I tried *67 and got a 3-beep confirmation follwed by second dialtone. It *does* prevent the number from displaying. While the bill insert didn't mention anything about per-line blocking nor did it mention *82 (11-82), that code is also now programmed into the local central office switches. It *could* be that *82 (11-82) will transmit/display the *true* telephone number (on POTS lines) if that line is default to display a 'phony' phone number. Regarding Inter-Lata/State Caller-ID, I did have a friend in Baton Rouge call me via WilTel (10-555/101-0555+) a few months back. I received his number *and* his name on my ID box (along with the date/time). Baton Rouge is a different LATA than mine, altho' both Baton Rouge and New Orleans are both still under NPA 504 (for the time being). I also have *69 (11-69) Call-Return on my home line. I did a *69 on the call from my friend in Baton Rouge. Here in Louisiana, *69 has quoted back the number (if it was not 'Out-of-Area') and then gave you the option of connecting to that number (in most cases). Sometimes, if the call was from a Payphone or a PBX trunk line, I did get the number (and name) on my ID box, and I did get the number on a *69 quote back, but I was told that I could *not* use *69 to connect back. I could however, manually dial back that number. I did get a full number (and date/time) quote back on *69 on the call from Baton Rouge, but I was *not* allowed a 'connect-back'. However, on calls which had been 'Privatized', I got the following: "This is your automatic callback service" (so far the same) "The number of your last incoming call is" (okay, no change) (now a 'different' audio quality- kinda like a splice) "A Private Number and cannot be announced". I was, however allowed the choice to connect-back to that number. But what if that number was toll to me? I don't know if Bell is going to offer 'Block the Blocker', but if 'Private' calls are a problem from telemarketers, I'll just let those calls roll over to cellular/voicemail, even when I am at home! I'm looking forward to the eventual introduction of Caller-ID-on-Call- Wait in the New Orleans area, along with other ADSI features- such as Visual List Editing. To determine the Caller-ID of a 'beeping' call, I have to hang up on my call in progress and let the new call 'ring-in'. When C-ID on CW is eventually offered in New Orleans, I won't have to do that anymore- and I can ignore a 'Private call' beeping in on me! MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: btatro@iquest.com (Tatro Enterprises) Subject: New Voice File Conversion Package-Press Release Date: 9 Nov 1995 01:54:18 GMT Organization: interQuest Online Services -- Huntsville, AL For more Information, contact Joane Stephens, 205-650-0095 or send email to: info@tatro.com. Huntsville, 8 November, 1995 Voice File Format Converter Version 2.0 For Immediate Release: Tatro Enterprises is pleased to announce the update to their telephony voice file format conversion program, ver. 2.0. The program will enable all IVR developers to convert voice files from all generally used vox-formats to all commonly-used wav-formats and back. This updated version includes the Wave Editor, a utility with which you can record and listen to Wav-Format files instead of having to use additional software in the Windowsb environment. Your recordings are graphically displayed on the screen and you can increase and decrease the volume or increase and decrease the speed of the recording. Wav files can be converted back to vox-format for inclusion in IVR-applications. Bulk conversion of files in one directory with directory synchronization is possible. The program runs under Windows 3.11b, Windows NTb 3.51 and Win 95b. The full program retails for US $20.00 plus $3.00 shipping and handling in North America (incl. Canada and Mexico), $6.00 for international shipping. A demonstration program is available which will let you convert files from vox- to wav-format using the default settings. The Wave Editor contains all functionality except that recorded or modified wav-files can not be saved. The following file-formats are supported: VOX-Format Options: PCM (8 bit) (ALaw-encoding possible) ADPCM (4 bit) - both 6000 Hz and 8000 Hz WAV-Format Options: 8000 Hz 11025 Hz 22050 Hz 44100 Hz - 8 bit or 16 bit per Sample - Mono or Stereo The demonstration program can be downloaded from the following internet site: ftp: vespucci.iquest.com /tatro-enterprises/demo/vfc.zip or http://iquest.com/~btatro c. Tatro Enterprises. All other brands and product names are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of their respective holders. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Edtior Subject: Spies on the Net, or "The CIA Controls EUnet" Date: Wed, 08 Nov 95 12:50:00 PST Forwarded to the Digest, for your entertainment: Subject: Spies on the net, take 2, or "The CIA controls EUnet" Forwarded-by: Larry Hunter From: jwarren@well.com (Jim Warren) Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 18:31:11 -0800 To: GovAccess@well.com Is Someone Already Watching All International Net Traffic? The following is the transcript of an actual communications trace that a friend ran, while I was sitting next to him, watching -- reprinted here with his permission. He did a "traceroute" of two messages that he sent from his machine in Switzerland (he'd telneted into it while we were at a computer conference in California). Traceroute automatically reports each Internet node through which a message passes, as it proceeds from origin to destination. He did two traceroutes. The first was from Switzerland to an addressee at Netcom in San Jose, California. The second was from Switzerland to an addressee in Israel. Date: Fri, 21 Apr 95 02:54:58 +0200 From: kelvin@fourmilab.ch (John Walker) To: jwarren@well.com Subject: Traceroute > /usr2/kelvin> traceroute netcom11.netcom.com traceroute to netcom11.netcom.com (192.100.81.121), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 eunet-router (193.8.230.64) 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 146.228.231.1 (146.228.231.1) 326 ms 345 ms 307 ms 3 Bern5.CH.EU.NET (146.228.14.5) 447 ms 408 ms 364 ms 4 146.228.107.1 (146.228.107.1) 127 ms 37 ms 36 ms 5 Zuerich1.CH.EU.NET (146.228.10.80) 37 ms 38 ms 175 ms 6 (134.222.9.1) 65 ms 109 ms 252 ms 7 lp (134.222.35.2) 196 ms 179 ms 405 ms 8 Vienna1.VA.ALTER.NET (137.39.11.1) 191 ms 179 ms 313 ms 9 fddi.mae-east.netcom.net (192.41.177.210) 336 ms 204 ms 303 ms 10 t3-2.dc-gw4-2.netcom.net (163.179.220.181) 182 ms 251 ms 187 ms 11 t3-2.chw-il-gw1.netcom.net (163.179.220.186) 305 ms 586 ms 518 ms 12 t3-2.scl-gw1.netcom.net (163.179.220.190) 537 ms 693 ms 797 ms 13 t3-1.netcomgw.netcom.net (163.179.220.193) 698 ms 549 ms 754 ms 14 netcom11.netcom.com (192.100.81.121) 890 ms 1922 ms 1696 ms > /usr2/kelvin> traceroute jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il traceroute to jerusalem1.datasrv.co.il (192.114.21.101), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 eunet-router (193.8.230.64) 2 ms 3 ms 2 ms 2 146.228.231.1 (146.228.231.1) 933 ms 853 ms 874 ms 3 Bern5.CH.EU.NET (146.228.14.5) 1040 ms 450 ms 525 ms 4 146.228.107.1 (146.228.107.1) 453 ms 424 ms 188 ms 5 Zuerich1.CH.EU.NET (146.228.10.80) 64 ms 61 ms 47 ms 6 (134.222.9.1) 80 ms 312 ms 84 ms 7 lp (134.222.35.2) 270 ms 400 ms 216 ms 8 Vienna2.VA.ALTER.NET (137.39.11.2) 660 ms 1509 ms 886 ms 9 dataserv-gw.ALTER.NET (137.39.155.38) 1829 ms 1094 ms 1306 ms 10 orion.datasrv.co.il (192.114.20.22) 1756 ms 1280 ms 1309 ms 11 ... Notice that both messages went through an unnamed site -- 134.222.9.1 and then a strangely-named site, "lp (134.222.35.2)" -- then through the same Vienna, Virginia (USA) site ... and thereafter, on to their destination. I.e., the second message went through Virginia to get from Switzerland to Israel. The whois servers at the InterNIC and at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information report, ``No match for "134.222.9.1". '' and `` No match for "134.222.35.2".'' Now let me see ... which spy agencies are located in or near Virginia? jim ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #473 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 9 20:23:22 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id UAA02664; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 20:23:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 20:23:22 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511100123.UAA02664@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #474 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Nov 95 20:23:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 474 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Old Western Electric CPE (Mark Cuccia) Book Review: "The Windows Internet Tour Guide" by Fraase (Rob Slade) V120 in Japan (Gregory Zamarski) IPL Service to Japan (Gregory Zamarski) Taking Bids to Purchase PBX (K. Smith) SS7 Questions (Jean-Marc Garin) High Speed Data Over Radio (Sven Palmersjo) 500 Service ... What's the Deal? (Joseph Singer) Basic Conversion Program For New Dutch Phone Numbers (Peter Zijderveld) Looking for Speakerphone with Full Duplex (Paul King) Wanted to Buy: 19"-25" Racks (Les Kula) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Old Western Electric CPE Date: Thu, 09 Nov 95 16:38:00 CST Recently there was a discussion about coiled handset cords, cloth v. rubber (or plastic) cords and old telephones. I will be referring to Western Electric (WE or WECO) here, but Northern Electric (NE) in Canada was associated with Western Electric for many many years, under various cross patenting arrangements. NE was the equipment company for Bell Canada, and more or less still is, although its name changed to Northern Telecom sometime in the 1970's or so, and they now choose to be called Nortel. Bell Northern Research was formed in the early 1970's, out of NE (or NT) to be something like the Bell Labs in Canada. The 'French' phone came out in the mid 1920's. It was Bell/WE's first 'combined handset' telephone for the general public. I think that Bell had a lineman's handset prior to the 'French' phone. The original 'French' phones had a *round* base. I've seen references to the model number `201' for the round base, however I've also seen it referred to as the `102' phone. The oval base phone known as the 202 came out about a year after the round base phone. This phone had *no* built in ringer nor induction coil. An associated box mounted to the wall contained a ringer and induction coil. This box was known as the *subscriber subset* but popularly known as a ringer box. The `211' phone was a little steel rectangular cube box mounted with a bracket to the side of a desk or shelf. Sometimes this phone was known as a `hanger phone'. The handset hook was on the side, and a dial was mounted by another bracket on top. A non-dial model could be arranged by removing the entire dial-mounting perched on top, rather than just removing the dial from its mounting. Both of these phones originally had a 'French' type of handset -- with a small hornlike cup protruding from the mouthpiece part. These handsets were not as ornate nor fancy as the actual phones used in France and other parts of the world (or the 'decorator' phones of today), but the handsets were a bit more ornate than some later handsets. This handest was known as an `E-1' handset, and is *quite* heavy compared with those of today. The sound quality was also inferior to later models. Originally it had a large round module for the carbon transmitter insert, while the receiver part was more 'built in' with a flat metal disk diaphram which can be 'slid' off or popped out. In 1937, Bell came out with the `302' phone. The early ones were in a steel case, but bakelite ones came out later -- I don't know if they switched to bakelite right before the War or right after. This phone was the first desk phone from Bell/WE with the ringer and induction coil built in the phone itself. The handset was the `F-1' model, somewhat arched back. It had improved sound quality over the `E-1' and had 'removable' transmitter and receiver inserts. The `352' was the wall version in the 300-series; I've only seen it in bakelite. The first combined multi-line key phone from WE/NE was a `302' type phone. It came out in 1938, with six *round* clear *glass* buttons, even for 'hold'. Prior to 1938, multiline keying functions were controlled by a separate box associated with a 202 phone. There are pictures of those pre-302 key functions in the book "A History of Engineering & Science in the Bell System- Switching Technology, 1925-75" published in the early 1980s by AT&T/Bell Labs, edited by Amos E. Joel (now retired from Bell Labs). The first 302 type keyphones were probably steel- I don't know if WE made them in bakelite later. The 500 deskset was introduced in 1949. This was the first non-coin phone to have the larger dial assembly- the dials themselves had been 3-inches, but the 500 set had the ring with digits/letters around the outside of the dial, making the full assembly 4.25 inches. The first models were, of course, black, and had *metal* fingerwheels on the dials. The 554 was the wall version which came out around 1954. Also about this time was the *color* 500 series phones. They were really 'two-tone' models (and here I dont mean DTMF- but color ), with a black dial assembly (the 'ring' around the dial was black along with the metal fingerwheel). Some other parts were black as well -- I think that the cords were black, but the handset might have been either black or the color of the base -- I can't remember right now). Full color phones came out about a year later, but the two-tone models were still being marketed as well -- but I think that there was a lack of interest in the two-tone ones after full solid color models came out. Also, the full color models had *plastic* fingerwheels on the dials- but a *harder* plastic than used today. And the center of an older plastic fingerwheel was open -- it didn't have the top all covered up with the same molded plastic. These early plastic fingerwheels had a grinding sound when the dial was spun, while later ones were softer. Early 500 keysets also had six round glass clear buttons, including the hold button. A 554 wall version could be used on a multi-line setup, but it usually had a separate box mounted next to it with the six keys. As for cords and handsets: I've seen coiled handset cords on phones as early as the 202 model. It might have been 'added' to the phone some years later. And cloth cords weren't exclusively used on 202's and 302's -- rubber cords, plastic cords, and even coiled cords were used as well. You did pay extra for a coiled handset cord over a straight cord for a while, but eventually the coiled cord became the de-facto standard. BLACK was the standard color for older models, but you could also pay extra for a color bakelite 302 phone. 202's and steel 302's could be painted a different color -- usually a metalic color. Stright plastic cords were used on 500 sets, but coiled cords also date back to the early years of the 500. The F-1 handset (the arched back ones) began to be put on 202's probably as a replacement handset, although the original handset for 202's was the E-1 (the French handset). I *have* seen some pictures of a 302 phone with an E-1 handset, but I always thought it looked 'funny'. Another interesting 'hybrid' with interchangeable parts was the 5300 phone. (I've also seen it referred to as the 3500). It was really a 302 desk phone but had a 500 housing. The 302 phones were *smaller* than the 500's, so it was a smaller 500's housing. The cradle was designed to take either an F-1 handset or the 500's handset, the G-1. As for the dial, a 4.25 inch wide dial assembly (the 500 style) could be used, or a 'blank' ring insert could be mounted in the dial hole in the housing, with an older 3-inch dial mounted in that. Unless you looked carefully, you might think that this was a 500 phone especially if it had the wider dial assembly and a G-1 handset, however it still had a B-type ringer (with its 41-A and 41-B gong pair) and 'rang' like most 302/352 style phones. There is an article about the 5300 phone (3500?) in a 1950's era issue of Bell Laboratories Record. These phones were built to last for *years* -- they might have been heavy, but they were *sturdy*. You could spin a dial without having the phone slide all over the table. Even with touchtones today, I find that today's ultralight platic phones still slide around when using them. You could use older phones as a paperweight -- when writing down a phone number on a slip of paper, you could put a corner of the paper under the part of the phone. And the phones *ring* with authority and clarity -- real electromechanical ringers with real metal bell gongs. Except for my cellular phone, the phones for my personal use (both at home and here at work) are real Western Electric phones -- I have at least one of most of the WE/Bell phones of the 1920's thru the 1960's described above. I do have a pocket battery powered touchtone dialer for those times I want or *have* to enter touchtones, however, since all of my personal use phones are rotary dial. And these phones will also work on such digital offices as DMS, #5ESS, even digital PBX's if the line is still an analog line. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Nov 1995 01:00:52 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Windows Internet Tour Guide" by Fraase BKWNINTG.RVW 951011 %A Michael Fraase mfraase@farces.com %C P.O. Box 2468, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 %D 1994 %G 1-56604-081-7 %I Ventana Press, Inc. %O U$24.95 919/942-0220 FAX 919/942-1140 dludlow@vmedia.com %P 344 %T "The Windows Internet Tour Guide" "The Windows Internet Tour Guide", Fraase, 1994, 1-56604-081-7, U$24.95 Fraase's book is a real grab bag. It has some good information, some excellent writing, some gaps, some errors, some promises and a lot of graphics (of which the author seems inordinately fond). It isn't so much Windows specific as (NetManage's) Chameleon specific. Overall, the discussion of Internet applications and use covers the major topics, and gives the new user a reasonable understanding of the basic tools. The chapter on "Getting Connected" proposes a very broadly based and helpfully divided overview of the various options. It starts with talk of the university, government, and corporate options, of which many potential users remain unaware. The difference between dedicated dial-up IP and dial-up terminal is raised, although the promised discussion of dial-up terminal and commercial "email gateway" access never seems to materialize. The personal and community aspects of the net get a lot of space. Some important, but often neglected, aspects of file characteristics and transfer are raised, albeit briefly. The "Neat Stuff" section really does have some interesting and little known resources. On the other hand, the quality of the information is very uneven. The setup of the included programs is said to be easy, but I suspect that a very thorough familiarity with modems would be needed in view of the extremely brief instructions for the Chameleon software configuration. (The Chameleon Sampler software is included with the book.) The "points of interest" are interesting, but seldom have anything to do with the surrounding text. (A pleasant exception to this are some of the useful and helpful points in the email section.) The directions on how to use and access resources on the net are *not* going to be helpful unless you are using the included software (and that type of dial-up connection). Every set of directions assume a full, or at least dial-up, IP connection. Interestingly, the heavy reliance on gopher apparent in "The PC Internet Tour Guide" seems to be somewhat reduced (though not eliminated) here. There are a number of dated addresses, as well as some that are just plain wrong (one suspects through bad editing). Seasoned Internauts will be able to correct these errors, but then, seasoned Internauts aren't likely to be using the book. At one seminar I was told to promote this book because it had software. The software included may be useful, depending upon the user's level of access to the net, but is neither necessary nor unique. Most local Internet providers use dynamic address allocation, and that isn't covered in this book. In any case, the included materials are demonstration software, and available online. An interesting feature is the promise of an electronic update to the guide, distributed via electronic mail. The book has a coupon for two of the quarterly updates free; regular price is $25 per year. Although I've reviewed two other books in this series, I have not seen any of the updates. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1995 BKWNINTG.RVW 951011. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | "La mathematica e l'alfabeto Institute for rslade@cln.etc.bc.ca| nel quale Dio ha scritto Research into rslade@freenet/ | l'universo." User .vancouver.bc.ca | Security Canada V7K 2G6 | - Galileo ------------------------------ From: zamarski@astral.magic.ca (Gregory Zamarski) Subject: V120 in Japan Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 19:07:51 -0500 Organization: Magic Online Services Toronto Inc. Does anyone know if the International Telecommunications Union (ITU-T) recommendation V120 associated with ISDN is supported in Japan? ------------------------------ From: zamarski@astral.magic.ca (Gregory Zamarski) Subject: IPL Service to Japan Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 19:17:51 -0500 Organization: Magic Online Services Toronto Inc. Has anyone had any recent experiences with ordering and/or using International Private Line (IPL) service to Japan from North America? How would you rate the service you received from KDD, ITJ or IDC? ------------------------------ From: ksmith@telesource.com (K. Smith) Subject: Taking Bids to Buy PBX Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 22:16:08 GMT Organization: scruz-net We are in the market to buy a new or used digital PBX system and voice mail to serve a minimum of 12 lines and 65 stations. We would like Auto Attendant features and need to have an integrated T1 card. Please send questions and proposals via email: Sincerely, Kevin Smith, President ksmith@telesource.com TeleSource U.S.A. (408) 247-4782 voice 2405 Beechwood Avenue (408) 247-1070 fax San Jose, CA 95128 info@telesource.com ------------------------------ From: garin@clbull.frcl.bull.fr (Jean-Marc Garin) Subject: SS7 Questions Date: 9 Nov 1995 14:39:37 GMT Organization: BULL Les Clayes, FRANCE I am a beginner to the SS7 world (MTP1/2/3 + SCCS + user parts), and would appreciate some information about it. Q.1: Where can I find a good description of the protocols, and the reason why they were defined? I can read the ITU-T standards, but I miss the real (that is, practical) understanding of these standards: roles, uses, weight of the past, ... To give you an idea of the level of answers I expect, I have fundamental questions such as for instance "Is a platform only equipped with MTP1/2/3 (i.e. without SCCS and user parts) of any interest? and where does it take place in a network (in which network element?)?", or again "In which situation is SCCS required? Only for interconnection of national networks?", ... Q.2: What typical applications are there directly on top of MTP3? on top of SCCS? on top of TCAP? on top of ISUP/ITP/...? That leads to another question: Q.3: At which level do you think APIs are really required? And why? Is there a consensus (industry or standard body) upon these APIs? If no, does that mean that the SS7 stack must come from the same provider as that of the SCE that will be used? Q.4: Are there significant differences between SS7 platforms used in Europe and platforms used in North America (= are the standards the same? Is this one only applicable in N.A.? Is this other only for Europe? ...). Where could take place in the SS7 platform the geographical specificities? Please reply by e-mail since I am only occasionally connected. If some are interested I will post the replies as well. Thanks in advance, JM. J.M.Garin@frcl.bull.fr ------------------------------ From: sven.palmersjo@mailbox.swipnet.se (Sven Palmersjo) Subject: High Speed Data Over Radio Date: 9 Nov 1995 21:16:06 GMT Organization: Palax Elektronik I am looking for a commercial data radio which is certified within a EG country to have it automaticaly certified in Sweden. Demands for it is: 420-430 Mhz 0.5 watts or more Small 9600 bd or more Protocol with error correction Please let me know. Best regards, Sven ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 07:04:41 -0800 From: jsinger@scn.org (Joseph Singer) Subject: 500 Service - What's the deal? Reply-To: jsinger@scn.org Just a little background. I'd heard about the new personalized 500 service being first offered by AT&T and then MCI started to issue these numbers also. In order to have 500 service from either AT&T or MCI they told me that I had to be presubscribed to their service (i.e. I had to have them as my 1+ provider for long distance.) I am presubscribed to MCI and made the inquiry to set up service. They were doing a promotion that the service would be no charge until January of 1996 and then $1/month thereafter. It took about three or four weeks to set up the service. They let me choose my number from a choice of prefixes and I could choose the last four digits as I chose. At any rate the service was finally installed and I explored my various options. With the MCI service you supposedly have only two options: 1) have your party dial 1-500 and have the call billed to the line that dials that number or dial 0-500 to have the call billed to a card. This is where it gets interesting. I have tried from numerous places, coin phones, business phones and my second line to dial my number (1-500-484-2327 [aka 1-500-HUG-BEAR]) and have never been able to complete a call. When you dial 0-500 you get some chimes that say "friends and family 500 service please wait for the operator." The operator then asks for your card number. You ask "what card number does she want a telco calling card or a MasterCard/Visa". She answers calling card. You dictate the number (which I think is horrible for security) and then she announces "thank you I am placing your call." (wait, wait, momentary sounds of reorder), Operator: "I'm sorry sir the line is busy." I ask the operator "is that a regular busy or a fast busy." She answers "Fast busy." I then call F&F 500 service customer service number. The rep tells me that I must use a "credit card" such as Visa/MasterCard. I try the routine again and use a credit card. Still no go. I've come to the point that I see that the service is marginally useful at all. Evidently MCI cannot make the service work with anything other than 1+ and that this number cannot be reached by a good number of people. It cannot be reached from a pay telephone, from a cell phone or from most businesses. It is essentially a useless service. On top of this I've heard that some unscrupulous people are using it for the phone sex business and that calling their 500 numbers will result in huge call charges. This technology has not arrived by a longshot. JOSEPH SINGER SEATTLE, WASHINGTON USA jsinger@scn.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it just now from here in Skokie, Illinois (708-329) and the results were that when I dialed 1-500 and your number, I did get the MCI branding then I was automatically put on hold after bieng told "once you are connected with your party if you wish to call the second number on his reach list press the pound key for two seconds." There were short beeps about every ten seconds for a minute or so, the the recording advised me that you could not be reached and to try my call again later. When I did 0-500, the results I got were the same as how you described it. An operator asked for 'card number please' and I read off my Ameritech calling card number. Long wait ... perhaps 30 seconds, and the operator reported that 'the number you are calling is out of order.' When I questioned what that meant, and how the operator knew it was out of order, I was told it was because of the 'fast busy' signal. I told the operator I did not hear anything at all, and the operator said that's because I had been on hold while the number was dialed. The operator did ask me to repeat the number I had dialed, and seemed sort of incredulous at seeing such a number on the screen. I think you had better tell them to fix it. They are not alone though; AT&T had an obscure little bug in theirs which was reported here a few months ago. It involved something to do with intra-lata calls via 500 numbers which were being handled by Ameritech. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pzijde@pi.net (Peter Zijderveld) Subject: Basic Conversion Program For New Dutch Phone Numbers Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 21:32:20 GMT Organization: Planet Internet We developed an enhanced conversion program for the new Dutch telephone numbers. It can be used for Thoroughbred Basic, BBx and MAI Basic Four. This tool will search for all files to find fields that contain phone numbers. In a few hours we can arange the whole conversion for you. If someone is interested please contact me. Peter Zijderveld Zilverahorn 41 5237 HB 's-Hertogenbosch The Netherlands Phone: +31 73 6427477 Fax: +31 73 6441508 E-mail: pzijde@pi.net ------------------------------ From: bm277@torfree.net (Paul King) Subject: Looking For Speakerphone With Full Duplex Organization: Toronto Free-Net Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 22:54:49 GMT Hi, I am trying to buy a speakerphone with full duplexing capability. I know there are many of speakerphones without duplexing, but I just like to know if there is one. If there is I would like to buy one at any cost. Please e-mail me your help advice since I don't follow up this newsgroup. Thanks, Paul ------------------------------ From: lkula@Eng.Sun.COM (Les Kula) Subject: Wanted to Buy: 19"-25" Racks Date: 9 Nov 1995 23:31:35 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc. Reply-To: lkula@Eng.Sun.COM Looking for 19", 23" or 25" racks for electronics equipment. Quantity : 1-2 x 19" and 1 x 23" or 25" Brand : preferably Chatsworth (*) Color : preferably black (*) Height : 7' for 19", will consider shorter ones for 23" or 25" (*) Shelves : at least 4-5 per rack, for wider racks at least 2 heavy duty shelves for laser printer and dot matrix printer Base : need base with casters (they come on separate square-frame attachement) since the racks are for my residence, I must be able to move them, can't drill holes for anchores in the floor like in the lab. Attachments : any extra parts like slide trays, cable guides, handles, extra mounting bolts etc. are of interest. Location : I'll pick-up anywhere in San Francisco Bay Area (*) means - I'm flexible Les ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #474 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 10 08:31:58 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA04533; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 08:31:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 08:31:58 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511101331.IAA04533@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #475 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Nov 95 08:31:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 475 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Bill Dripps) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (David E A Wilson) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Dennis G. Rears) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Michael Franz) Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (Curtis Wheeler) Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line (James E. Bellaire) Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Josh Rubin) UK Answer Phone in Belgium (Dominic Hanlan) AT&T Partner Mail on PC Hardware Remote Access (Anthony W. Collins) Updates About Israeli Number Scheme Plans (Amos Shapira) Re: Limits to Redialing? (Mike Sandman) Re: Voice Mail Uses Different Frequencies Than Dialing? (Andy Spitzer) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: drippsb@platinum.nb.net (Bill Dripps) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: 9 Nov 1995 23:09:49 GMT Organization: The National Business Network Inc In article , Dave Levenson wrote: > John Shaver (steep-mo-m@huachuca-emh2.army.mil) writes: >> Justice at last!!! > and quotes from a Bell Atlantic press release: >> Subject: Wireless Customers Can Save With Calling Party Pays > Can anybody fill in a few details on this? I cannot answer the specific questions you asked, but I can fill in a few details. I called Bell Atlantic Mobil's local agent who of course knew nothing of this. He was very interested though, because it could help him to sell more cell phones. He called his rep at Bell Atlantic Mobil who called his rep at Bell Atlantic proper who, I am told, said: The service is not currently available anywhere in BA land and they do not have any dates or other information as to where or when it might be available. This was simply an announcement of an intention to provide a service, not even a firm commitment to do it. BA did want to know about any responses in case they might want to offer a test of the service. My local agent speculated that perhaps someone else was going to actually offer this service and BA was attempting to forstall the competition. Personally I don't believe BA would stoop to that. Obviously, there was simply an honest mistake. But I would love to see this service; I was ready to buy! Bill Dripps 814-234-7975x31 drippsb@nb.net ------------------------------ From: david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: 10 Nov 1995 11:56:38 +1100 Organization: University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia. cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) writes: > Bell Atlantic should at least put this new "Feature" in its own > prefix so "caller-pays" can be blocked without giving the rest of us > "regular" cellular users a bad reputation for air-time rip-offs. Here in Australia we have always (as far as I know) had caller pays for calls to mobile phones and our mobile phones have their own prefixes (015, 018 and 019 for analog, 041 for digital). The calls are charged at the 2nd highest STD rate for calls up to 745km and the same as landline calls over this distance. The explosion in cellular phone usage has not caused the same problems of are code splitting here as it has in the USA -- we just add another mobile prefix. David Wilson Dept CompSci Uni Wollongong Australia david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ From: Dennis G. Rears Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Reply-To: drears@pica.army.mil Organization: U.S Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 13:45:58 GMT Last December, I went to Australia to visit family. They have two telephone companies, Telecom Australia and Optus. Both companies have cell service. Each company has a country wide area code for their cell service. My brother uses '015'. The caller pays for the call. The caller knows he's paying for the call because of the area code. I think this system is far better than the US system. They also don't have the land based charges we do. When I call his cell phone from the states I get charged the same rates as if if I called his regular number. dennis ------------------------------ From: franz@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Franz) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 10:42:05 +0200 Organization: Institute for Computersysteme, ETH Zurich As far as I know, all European GSM networks are caller-pays. The cellulars are usually on a separate area code so that it is obvious that you are calling a special number. However, the "specialness" of the area code is visible only from within the country that the GSM is registered in. When you call a GSM phone from another country, you only pay the normal long-distance fee of the country you are calling from. For example, it can be cheaper to call a Swiss cellular from Britain than placing a call to it from within Switzerland. It might have been a better idea to put all GSM phones on a separate country code. Michael ------------------------------ From: Curtis Wheeler Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Date: 8 Nov 1995 06:30:47 GMT Organization: CCnet Communications I removed the names associated with the quoted text since I had a hard time figuring out who said what after I snipped it up... >> No, you can't have it because it looks too much like fraud when roaming." >> Having two phones with the same number is intrinsically no more >> "fraudulent" than hooking up an extension phone in one's own home. > Having a second line installed with the same number costs money > everywhere I have been. These are NOT extensions within a single > building. Cell phones are 'extensions' from the MTSO. > A fair price should be paid for 'extension' phones, either wired off- > premises or celluar. If you want a lock so that only one phone in > your shared setup can make a call at a time then PAY for the software > to do that. Otherwise PAY for the ability to use the phones > independently. > Cloning gives a FREE service to customers, without the provider's > consent. It is the right of any company to sell their product at the > price they want. It is NOT the right of the consumer to take product > without paying that price. One of things used in determining cellular rates is access. One ESN, one phone. If you want to compare a cloning to adding an extention in your house, you need to look at it this way: Think of your cellular telephone as your demarc from the cellco. You can only add equipment on YOUR side of the demarc. Cloning a phone and using it on the network is comparable to adding an extension on the telephone company's side of the demarc. I used to install cell phones (back when there were bigger bucks in that business). We used to install phones with "limo kits", that is a usable handset in the front and back seat of a car. Not a problem -- just like adding an "extension". But we effectivly did it on the customer's side of the demarc -- both handsets went through one transceiver. You should also keep this in mind when trying to determine what you have control over, and access to, when it comes to your cell phone: You use your cellular phone (technically a radio station) under the license of the service provider -- you don't have to go out and get your own station license. The cellular service provider maintains effective control of your phone -- the only thing you do is enter phone numbers, press the "send" and "end" keys, and turn the power on and off. But the cellular carrier controls the transmitter -- from power level to channel selection -- to signalling and other call supervision. They own the radio link, they control the radio link, you don't. Your just allowed to communicate over it -- you get access with your type accepted equipment in accordance with the FCC rules and carrier's tariffs. Curtis Wheeler - Pleasanton, CA ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 02:05:54 -0500 From: James E. Bellaire Subject: Re: Multiple Phone on Cellular Line Previously I wrote: >> Having a second line installed with the same number costs money >> everywhere I have been. These are NOT extensions within a single >> building. Cell phones are 'extensions' from the MTSO. >> A fair price should be paid for 'extension' phones, either wired off- >> premises or celluar. If you want a lock so that only one phone in >> your shared setup can make a call at a time then PAY for the software >> to do that. Otherwise PAY for the ability to use the phones >> independently. At 06:30 AM 11/8/95 GMT, Curtis Wheeler wrote: > One of things used in determining cellular rates is access. One ESN, one > phone. > If you want to compare a cloning to adding an extention in your house, > you need to look at it this way: Think of your cellular telephone as > your demarc from the cellco. You can only add equipment on YOUR side of > the demarc. Cloning a phone and using it on the network is comparable to > adding an extension on the telephone company's side of the demarc. > I used to install cell phones (back when there were bigger bucks in that > business). We used to install phones with "limo kits", that is a usable > handset in the front and back seat of a car. Not a problem - just like > adding an "extention". But we effectivly did it on the customer's side > of the demarc - both handsets went through one transceiver. So should I be able to install a second demarc for my single line service anywhere I feel like? If the cell phone is the demarc, then operating two phones is having two demarcs. How far away can I install my second demarc? In the wired system I would have to use the telco wires to get a second demarc off premisis. In cell phones that second demarc could be anywhere in World Zone 1, if roaming. "Limo Kits" do not require cloning and are simple transciever sharing devices. The tranciever has the MIN and ESN, not the handset in these setups, just like the demarc has the telco wire number and phone number that you chain your extensions in parallel to. As far as licensing goes, you pay the cellco for permission to use their FCC granted license based on the offer they make. If they choose to say "one phone per number" then you must abide by that rule or you lose your permission to use their license. You can't take services from a company just because you want them, you must contract for them and pay for them, following agreemenents between you and the company. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) Twin Kings Communications bellaire@tk.com ------------------------------ From: jrubin@inforamp.net (Josh Rubin) Subject: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 02:07:35 Organization: InfoRamp Inc. Hi Folks, My query has probably already been covered in an FAQ somewhere, but just in case, I'm wondering how a Telco could guarantee that any particular call on an ISDN line would be digital. It strikes me that unless you're in a closed system such as a university or corporation, that they really couldn't gurantee it. The reason is that a number of places still don't have fully digital networks. If I am trying to call a BBS in an area code that has an all digital network from another similarly-equipped region, what guarantee do I have that the call doesn't have to go through some analog switches on its way to the other area code, thus slowing data down immensely (i.e. getting regular service at premium ISDN rates)? Posted or e-mailed responses would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Josh Rubin jrubin@inforamp.net http://www.inforamp.net/~jrubin/ ------------------------------ From: dhan@sh.bel.alcatel.be (dominic hanlan sh37 7786) Subject: UK Answer Phone in Belgium Date: 10 Nov 1995 09:20:51 GMT Organization: Alcatel Bell Reply-To: dhan@sh.bel.alcatel.be Hi, Anybody out there in Belgium know how to get a UK answer phone (or any UK phone for that matter) to detect a ring when connected to the Belgian network? I understand that the Belgian system only uses two wires and each phone detects its' own ring. The UK has a master box which splits this off to the second pair of wires. I tried using a Belgian phone plugged into the same socket as the UK phone which then appeared to have a voltage on its' ring pair but still no ring from the phone. Apart from this problem the phone works perfectly !! Anyone have any solutions, ideas ..... ?? Cheers, Dominic ------------------------------ From: Anthony W Collins Subject: AT&T Partner Mail on PC Hardware Operating System Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 04:39:35 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Does anyone know what the operating system on the Partner Mail is? It appears you could pop in a video card connect a monitor and keyboard and find out ... anyone done this? DON'T ASK AT&T; they won't tell you. ------------------------------ From: amoss@humus.cs.huji.ac.il (Amos Shapira) Subject: Updates About Israeli Number Scheme Plans Date: 10 Nov 1995 10:42:09 GMT Organization: Inst. of Comp. Sci., Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel Hello, In relation to a question posted here a few weeks ago, here are a couple of datagrams from Israeli newspapers: 1. Within one year all numbers will be seven digits. During the next year (1996) all 1/2 million numbers which still have six digits will get another digit in front of them. Bezeq (the Israeli PTT) promises that after these changes there won't be any changes in phone numbers for two decades. This week (November 5th) the first stage begins in the Haifa area were all the numbers beginning in 2-7 will have 8 in front of them. Later on the numbers in Rehovot (December), Bat-Yam, Holon, the South (the Negev and Arava areas), Jerusalem, the Sharon area, and the nourth will be changed until the end of '96. All owners of changing numbers will be notified at least three months ahead. They will also get free calls in order to notify others about the change. Also until the updated directories are out the directory service (144) will be free. 2. Bezeq's marketing dept. is about to finish within a few weeks checks about the possibility of making the entire country a single calling area. This change also includes a recommandation for FREE LOCAL CALLS (same exchange). Hope you find this interesting. Cheers, Amos Shapira 133 Shlomo Ben-Yosef st. Jerusalem 93 805 ISRAEL amoss@cs.huji.ac.il ------------------------------ From: mike@sandman.com (Mike Sandman) Subject: Re: Limits to Redialing? Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 04:30:12 GMT Organization: Mike Sandman Enterprises Bren Smith wrote: > I vaguely remember a product called a Demon Dialer on the market about > ten years ago, that allowed you to redial busy numbers at some > phenomenal rate per minute. It then seemed to disappear from the > market. > Is it true that the Demon Dialer disappeared because of LEC's limitations > on the number of times you can redial within a certain time period? We sell a product called the Powerdialer which is many times faster than the old Demon Dialer -- which I loved! The Demon Dialer was made by Zoom, who it looks like still puts their modems in the same box as the Demon Dialer. This thing dials up to ten times a minute (250 times in ten minutes). It actually learns how fast it can go on your telephone line. After every ten times, it dials a different number for a second, then returns to dialing the busy number. One of these days I'll try to put a .voc file up with the picture and description that's already in our web catalog. In the mean time, you can give us a call at our office and we'll dial it over a speakerphone for you. Unbelievable! It will also do last number redial and unanswered redial (a little slower pace). It can be hooked up to a single line phone or on a line in front of a key system. On the down side, it only stores ten numbers in memory as opposed to 194 in the Demon Dialer ... so it's tied to a specific application. It does a heck of a job at winning phone call-in contests! Mike Sandman 708-980-7710 E-mail: mike@sandman.com WWW: http://www.sandman.com Our 48 page catalog of Unique Telecom Products & Tools is now on the World Wide Web. We have a fantastic assortment of Cable Installation Tools and Training Videos to help you use them. NEW "Basic ISDN" Training Video is now available. Also check out our Telephony History Page, which contains ads and articles from telephony related magazines from the first part of the century. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Nov 95 18:43:58 EST From: woof@telecnnct.com (Andy Spitzer) Subject: Re: Voice Mail Uses Different Frequencies Than Dialing? Eric Levy-Myers wrote: > However, in Bell Atlantic's voice mail (inside a Centrex, I guess) , > the systems does not recognize the 3 or 6 key. For normal dialing, the > 3 and 6 keys work fine. All the other keys work fine. Bell Atlantic > blames the phones, without any suggestion as to why they work in the > normal system and not in the voice mail. TT Systems says that some > Telecom's have recently tightened the frequency requirements and they > are working on a fix. But they seem utterly mystified as to why the > telecom's have suddenly changed ("tightened") their standards. The DTMF detectors used for dialing, are completly different (physically) than those used by CO Based v-mail equipment. Those used for dialing only need to detect DTMF in the presence of pure dialtone (aka the switch is sending out dialtone, some of which is leaking back due to sidetone from your phone, and other reasons). The v-mail equipment, on the otherhand, has a much more difficult task. It must detect DTMF in the presence of voice! This means they must be able to detect DTMF while they are playing your messages, or menus, or whatever, back to you, so that you can press a digit and get instant action. DTMF was designed to be used in the presence of dialtone, not voice! It is a very difficult problem to quickly and accurately detect DTMF, while not 'falsing' and thinking that the voice being played out (of which some is leaking back) is NOT DTMF. So v-mail DTMF detectors have different requirements for detection than the CO's. The CO only has to deal with locally generated DTMF in a close to ideal environment: a known signal (dialtone or silence) on the line. V-mail has to be able to handle DTMF generatred by a pay-phone at a noisy airport, while playing out random (from it's point of view!) signals. As for "Telecom's have recently tightened the frequency requirements", I doubt it! DTMF specs are a well known, well documented standard. There are three parts to a valid DTMF tone: frequency, twist, and volume. Frequency says that both tones must be within some % of the standard frequency. Volume says that the total energy of the tones must be so strong, but not TOO strong. Twist says that the energy of each frequency must be close to the energy of the other frequency. I have seen problems similar to what you describe. Only the culprit was an ISDN phone which didn't generate the correct DTMF tones (for some digits!) when the far end was a non-ISDN circuit. Other times I've seen DTMF not detected correctly are when it is too loud, or in the presence of ALOT of noise. I'd suspect the phones. As an experiment, try a pocket DTMF dialer. See if that works. If it does, its the phones. Andy Spitzer woof@telecnnct.com The Telephone Connection 301-417-0700 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #475 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 10 17:02:30 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA12435; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 17:02:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 17:02:30 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511102202.RAA12435@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #476 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Nov 95 17:02:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 476 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Killer Application Myth (Christoph F. Strnadl) Some BellSouth Notes (Stan Schwartz) RCMP Charge Seven People With Telemarketing Fraud (Nigel Allen) Re: Big Brother - He's Everywhere! (Michael J. Kuras) New Jersey Residential ISDN (pmokover@ix.netcom.com) Book Review: "Data Communications: From Basics to Broadband" (Rob Slade) A Unique Pan-European Country Code? (Mark Cuccia) Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service (Scott Nelson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cstrnadl@austria.cp.philips.com (Christoph F. Strnadl) Subject: Re: The Killer Application Myth Organization: Philips C&P Austria/VAN Services Date: Wed, 08 Nov 95 16:57:09 GMT Mike Murdock wrote: > the "Killer Application". That is, the single application which will > generate so much additional usage that it will offset the cost of > installing the Enhanced Services Platform. > The Killer Application is a myth. Concerning just telephony services (i.e., the so-called enhanced telephony features) I quite agree. > widely accepted they must resolve the above stated impediments. This > means providing the user with the ability to customize the service to > their specific requirements, using a natural human interface, your > voice. > The "Killer Application" is individual choice with a natural voice > interface. * Individual choice from a range of options of telephony features: agreed * natural voice interface: not necessarily so. What immediately comes to my mind is the ADSI standard suitable for really easy access to all those enhanced telephony features (CIDCW, Call Waiting deluxe,...) thru a suitable CPE, e.g. a screen phone. > add Conference Calling to their feature set. If the customer is > required to call a service representative to order this additional > feature it is unlikely they will ever take this step. If, however, the True. > customer can simply speak "Add Feature" and "Conference" and the > Enhanced Service Platform automatically adds this feature to the > customers current feature list, it is more likely that the service > will be ordered and used. But what if the customer is already engaged in a call and receives a Call Waiting alert? How is she then going to "tell" the CPE that - the new caller shall hear a busy signal, or that - the new caller shall be re-routed to a standard text message, or that - the new caller shall be re-routed to a voice-mail box, or that - she is going to take the new call (temporarily) and suspend the old one? (to the best of my knowledge: these are some features of some Call Waiting deluxe packages). The ADSI standard is able to solve that via state-dependent, softkey-activated CPE resident features (so-caller ADSI scripts). > Additionally, the services should always use a common human interface. I would rather put it: "the services should always use a - consistent - easy-to-use - well understood interface". This *may* be a natural language interface for some people, but may also be a screen & softkey based interface with screen phones. As you are right in pointing out that not everybody is going to use every offeree enhanced service, it is also most probable that not everybody's satisfied with the same interface. > The DTMF pad is a poor interface. That's why Bellcore proposed the ADSI specification. Nobody'll every remember the '*' access codes without a manual. And then, those codes (theoretically?) may vary ... > The mythical killer application is not an application at all but a > variety of features providing individual choice and flexibility, a > natural easy to use human interface, and seamless integrated > capabilities. Agreed. I have got one more comment to make concerning the non-existence of a single killer application. The one application (or idea therof) I have come across which may has a fair chance to be eventually realised and become something like a killer application could be the following: Idea: Home ATM: * phone with smartcard reader * user has a stored value smartcard (aka electronic purse) * user dials into his home-banking application somewhere on the (POTS!!) network and transfers money from his bank account to his electronic purse This is not home-banking per se but, as a matter of fact, just one single application of a possible home-banking package. It is, though, a feature which to my opinion offers tremendous added value to the user, don't you think? Christoph F. Strnadl, Product Mgmt/VANS PHILIPS C&P / VAN Services Tel: +43 1 60101/1752 FAX: +43 1 6023568 cstrnadl@austria.cp.philips.com ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Some BellSouth Notes Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 23:49:21 -0500 I'd like to share some recent experiences with my "new" phone company, Bell South. - Last month, I received a postcard to tell me that the price of my "Memory Call" (voice mail) service was being reduced by $2.00 per month. In addition, the "reminder/wake-up call" feature was added to the service automatically, and at no additional charge (and I still get the $2.00 discount). - *69/return call service is offered here. Before returning your call, though, it reads the date and time of the number back to you. It will tell you if the calling number was "Private", but it will still return the call for you (unlike NY, where if the calling number was private you can't use *69 to call back). - CID Deluxe (Name and Number) was recently added here. This does a great job of uncovering the flaws in the telco database. Here are some interesting "names" I've received: -calls from two different numbers at NationsBank displayed either "Nations Bank" or "N CNB" (the former name); -a call from the office where I'm working displayed as LOWER CASE "charlotte, nc" (with punctuation - and I'm not working in or for the City of Charlotte. -a call from the voice mail reminder service showed up as the central office "CHARLOTTE CARM EL". -a call (via TotalTel) from the 212 area code displayed "NWYRCYZN01, NY" (I assume that means New York City Zone 01". -a call (also via TotalTel) from Nassau County in 516 displayed as "NASSAUZN04, NY". Similar translation as above. It also sometimes is displayed in lower case. -a call received when I was out of the house showed up as "PAY PHONE". I don't know any Mr. Phone. So what's the deal with lower case and punctuation? Is it whatever is in telco's records? How large is the name field? - A call from the City of Charlotte (Bell South) to 803-548-XXXX is within Charlotte's local calling area. However, returning the call from Fort Mill, SC, the Fort Mill Telephone Company charges for an extended area call. Does anyone else find this strange? Stan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 01:29:18 -0500 From: Nigel Allen Subject: RCMP Charge Seven People With Telemarketing Fraud Organization: Internex Online Here is a press release from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. I found the press release on the Canada NewsWire web site at http://newswire.flexnet.com/ I don't work for the RCMP, bt I thought TELECOM Digest readers would be interested in the arrests. SEVEN CHARGED WITH TELEMARKETING FRAUD MILTON, Ont., Nov. 9 /CNW/ - On November 9th, 1995, seven people were arrested for Conspiracy to Defraud the Public and Conspiracy to Launder Money Obtained by Crime by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Milton Detachment, Commercial Crime Section. CHARGED ARE: Albert MALKA, age 42, of Thornhill, Ontario Avraham BENMOISE, age 40, of North York, Ontario Paul KURLANDSKI, age 45, of North York, Ontario Lawrence BRESLOW, age 52, of North York, Ontario Warren ALBERT, age 31, of North York, Ontario Elie VIDAL, age 20 of Thornhill, Ontario Selijdin SALI, age 59 of Etobicoke, Ontario The accused were arrested by warrant and appeared in Provincial Court, College Park, Toronto for bail hearings. The charges resulted from a 10 month joint investigation with the RCMP Newmarket Proceeds of Crime Section and the Federal Bureau of Investigation into a boiler-room which operated in the Markham, Ontario area. The telemarketing scam involved the fraudulent sale of semi-precious metals and/or gem stones to or on behalf of numerous unsuspecting individuals. It is alleged the boiler-room operated under various corporate names such as Global Trading Services or Columbus Financial Group and represented themselves to be in Nassau, Bahamas and Phoenix, Arizona. The victims were all contacted via telephone with offers to sell their holdings of semi-precious metals (Indium/Germanium) or gem stones (rubies, sapphires, etc.). However, in order for the sale to be completed, the victims were required to make a security deposit as a sign of good faith or were required to make an additional purchase of the investment commodity. In some cases, the victims were charged a fictitious storage fee in order to release the goods prior to the sale. The victims' holdings were never liquidated and in some cases the investments did not exist. The victims, all residents of the United States, suffered losses estimated at $250,000 U.S. Dollars from this fraudulent boiler-room operation. For further information: Inspector W.C. (Ches) Somers, Officer In Charge, Milton Commercial Crime Section, Office - (905) 876-9651, Pager - 1-800-640-RCMP (pager no. 92349) 16:26 Eastern 09-Nov-1995 forwarded to the TELECOM Digest by Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ndallen@io.org Web page: http://www.io.org/~ndallen ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 04:01:20 -0500 From: mkuras@ccs.neu.edu (Michael J Kuras) Subject: Re: Big Brother - He's Everywhere! Organization: College of Computer Science, Northeastern University Pat, I have to admit you're right about your whole train of thought regarding the DejaNews service. While I will always find it most disconcerting that someone can find out what I posted in the last x months with little more than a few keystrokes, I still *wish* that people would have to at least put an EFFORT into the process. If someone wants to find out what I wrote, that's completely ok with me; it's just that I'm a bit concerned that this service will be used to specifically log what *I* post over a period of time. I'm a member of the US military, and while I love my country and genuinely want to serve it to the best of my ability, don't think that posting to "bad" newsgroups (e.g. rec.drugs.*, alt.sex.*) should be counted against me. I don't think I'd ever post to these groups, but is that because of mere morality or the fear or being tracked down and losing a career? Granted, the potential for abuse is rather limited, just as is Spam King's et al, but what if someone really wanted they could invest in a load of RAM/disk storage and develop profiles on specific people that are just as accurate as the credit reports supplied by TRW, Equifax, etc? (take that for what it's worth) Trust me, I'm an extraodinarily responsible person; but I wanted to post to something racy, well, dammit, I don't want it immediately available to the world. I want them to at least put _some_ effort into finding it! michael j kuras www.ccs.neu.edu/~mkuras mkuras@ccs.neu.edu ------------------------------ From: pmokover@ix.netcom.com Subject: New Jersey Residential ISDN Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 16:28:35 GMT Organization: Netcom The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities is about to consider Bell Atlantic's proposed residential ISDN tariff. If you have any comments on it, please send your comments in a letter to: Mr. James Nappi Secretary, Board of Public Utilities Two Gateway Center Newark, NJ 07102 Send a copy of your letter to: Ms. Blossom Peretz Division of Ratepayer Advocate 31 Clinton St Newark, NJ 07102 The Board is interested in hearing comments on this matter from interested members of the public. They have assured me that letters will be read and considered. Largely as a result of letters from the public, the Boards in other Bell Atlantic states have recently rejected all or part of BA's proposed residential ISDN rates and told them to come back with a more "consumer friendly" plan. You can get more information about this at: http://www.essential.org/cpt ------------------------------ From: roberts@mukluk.hq.decus.ca (Robert Slade) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 12:17:07 EST Subject: Book Review: "Data Communications: From Basics to Broadband" BKDCFBTB.RVW 951023 "Data Communications: From Basics to Broadband", Beyda, 1996, 0-13-366923-8 %A William J. Beyda %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1996 %G 0-13-366923-8 %I Prentice Hall %O +1-201-236-7139 fax: +1-201-236-7131 beth_hespe@prenhall.com %P 311 %T "Data Communications: From Basics to Broadband" Beyda's aim was to provide a clear readable textbook with a broad overview of the field of data communications. He has succeeded with this work which is not only suitable for an introductory course in communications, but also for the working technical professional who needs a quick but thorough background in the field to add to other knowledge. Telecom professionals may find that the material does not give sufficient depth for their purposes. Indeed, it does not come up to the technical quality of works such as McNamara's "Technical Aspects of Data Communication" (cf. BKTCHDCM.RVW) for those who want to know the "how" of the technology. Beyda does, however, touch on a number of very recent topics which are not covered in more traditional textbooks. (There is even an acknowledgement that RS-232-C is *not* the last standard in the series.) Teachers will find the end-of-chapter questions to be fairly simplistic, and not much use as assignments. The overall level of the material, however, is quite suitable for first or second year courses as a "communications literacy" introduction. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKDCFBTB.RVW 951023. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associatedd publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | "Hey, when *you* have the Institute for rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | box, *then* you can give Research into Rob_Slade@mindlink.bc.ca | us geography lessons. User rslade@freenet.vancouver.bc.ca| Until then, Tahiti is in Security Canada V7K 2G6 | Europe." - Sneakers ------------------------------ From: Mark Cuccia Subject: A Unique Pan-European Country Code? Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 15:33:00 CST According to Oftel, the Office of Telecommunications in the UK, which is the regulatory and numbering administrative governmental body, in Numbering Bulletin 17 (Oct.1995), Europe is to request that the ITU make Country Code 388 available for Pan-European services. Should this not occurr, then the European telephone standards organizations are considering a national numbering approach for Pan-European services, using the unused 00 capacity behind existing County Codes. ie: 44-00 for Pan-European services located in the UK, 33-00 for those located in France, etc. These Pan-European services would be billed at a Pan-European premium rate. I wonder if Pan-European services could also include a Freephone (Toll-Free) service or a 'local-call' or 'national call' rate services. I also wonder how '00' would be dialed for Pan-European services within the same country, since 00 is supposed to be the standard International Exit code for most European countries (and also many countries all over the world as well). There is also mention in Bulletin 17 that Country Code 800 has officially been made available by the ITU for International Freephone. Oftel can be accessed at: http://www.open.gov.uk/oftel/oftelwww/oftelhm.htm ftp://ftp.open.gov.uk/pub/docs/oftel A webpage version of the numbering bulletins are at Oftel's www address, while a more detailed version (in MS-Word) can be downloaded from Oftel's ftp address. The ITU can be accessed at: gopher://info.itu.ch http://www.itu.ch as well as several other URL's. They recently updated their MS-Word downloadable Telephone Country Code lists (both alphabetical and numerical lists) to reflect the official assignment of Code 800, as well as another 87X code (I don't remember which one right now) for some 'new and improved' version of International Maritime Satellite service. These Country Code lists are under 'Lists Annexed to ITU Operational Bulletin' on both the ITU's webpages and gophersites. Oftel Numbering Bulletin 17 also gives details about the new code & numbering for Reading in the UK. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: 08 Nov 95 09:51:21 EST From: Scott Nelson <73773.2220@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Exchange Radio Telephone Service > On 30 Oct 1995, Scott Montague (4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote: > Does anyone else know if their phone company offers such a > service? Does it operate the same? Or is Bell Canada unique > in this service, as much of its covering area is remote > locations. I'd be interested in hearing anyone else's > adventures with this service. While working for Rockwell International about 1989-1991, I sold a product for what the FCC called BETRS (Basic Exchange Radio Telephone Service). The product was called the CXR-424 which was Rockwell-ese for "Collins Exchange Radio, 450 MHz band, 24 channels". Due to poor availability of frequencies, Rockwell discontinued making the CXR-424. Also, Rockwell sold that division to Alcatel in 1991, but Alcatel still supports CXR-424s that are in the field. The CXR-424 was a digitally modulated radio that could carry one DS0 in a 8QAM modulated 450 MHz UHF carrier. (FYI, A DS0 is a digitally encoded voice circuit at 64 kb/s.) Actually, the channel could be either one toll-quality voice circuit or two voice channels using 32 kb/s ADPCM. A base station could have up to 6 RF channels, which was sufficient to support 24 subscriber lines under typical traffic engineering rules. Our biggest competitor was International Mobile Machines who built a product called Ultraphone. It used a high order voice compression they called RELP (I cannot remember what that stands for) that got 64 kb/s voice down to 14 kb/s, so they could get four digital voice channels in a single 20 kHz UHF carrier. It could serve a lot more subscribers, but had a high up-front cost due to a rather large base station configuration and complex echo cancellation circuitry. Alas, the FCC never saw fit to allow BETRS to run primary, but they made it co-exist with mobile radio at 150 MHz (VHF) and 450 MHz (UHF). The mobile systems never quite went away, and in fact, a number of illegal systems were also in operation. The mobile radio systems are all analog and use high power transmission, whereas the digital systems like the CXR-424 and Ultraphone operate with a much lower power and higher receiver sensitivity. Therefore, the CXR-424 and Ultraphone could not be use in very many places in the United States. As I said before, Rockwell discontinued the CSX-424, but I do not know what became of Ultraphone. There are probably 20-30 telcos using the CXR-424 and Ultraphone in the United States, but I only know of three. The one system I sold went to Rye Telephone's exchange in Kim, Colorado. It served about 96 subscribers (4 base stations) and was a real bear to work with due to the interference problems. IMM sold their first system to Sunflower Telephone in Kansas, then *I believe* they sold one to Silver Star Telephone in Freedom, Wyoming. The only remnant of this short era that I know of is a small outfit called Carlson Communications that sells some analog, single channel, point-to-point radios for VHF and UHF operation. Their product is called the Optaphone. As a small company, Carlson can make a living selling 20-30 radios a year for niche applications (like yours). They can be reached at: Carlson Communications P.O. Box 4000 Redway, CA 95560 (707) 923-4000 If you (or anyone else) call, tell Jim (James Carlson, president) I said hello. Scott Nelson - ANTEC Rowlett, Texas (Dallas area) 73773.2220@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #476 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 13 01:11:52 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA17384; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 01:11:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 01:11:52 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511130611.BAA17384@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #477 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Nov 95 01:11:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 477 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson What's This DC Phone Number? (WSJ Editorial via Danny Burstein) Canadian vs US Long Distance Rates (Lis Angus) Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? (Steve) This 500 Thing Is Getting Rediculous (Jeff Buckingham) UCLA Short Course on "Intelligent Software Agents" (William R. Goodin) Bell Canada and Canadian ISP's (Brian Tao) Sprint to Ignore *67? (aresnik@execpc.com) New Telecom Technology: Real-Time Fax/Voice-Mail on Data Net (Bob Stone) Oldest 1AESS Cuts (was Re: Limits to Redialing?) (Les Reeves) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: What's This DC Phone Number? WSJ Editorial: 11/10/95 Date: 11 Nov 1995 18:19:51 -0500 The following is reposted from the {Wall Street Journal}, as relayed via the Usenet whitewater group. (I've confirmed they ran an editorial but haven't been able to get a print copy to confirm the exact wording). Perhaps someone here (TELECOM Digest) could give these folk a hand? (I've also included the comments made by the Usenet poster. I don't particularly agree or disagree with the sentiments, but I am curious about the number involved). Matt Rearwin writes: > Hi, > As you read the following editorial, think about several things. > - what sort of person or agency has a phone number the phone company > does not acknowledge, in the Washington DC area code? > - why would Hillary know this person? > - why would Hillary have any dealings with this person? > - why would Hillary call this person on the day Vince Foster was killed? > - what would this say about the activities that Hillary and/or Foster > are involved in? > It should be clear to the most ardent nay-sayers by now, that something > more than a simple suicide occurred with Foster. > Have a happy Veterans day, > Matt > and now, the WSJ: > (202) 628-7087? > Does anyone know anything about this mysterious phone number? Bell > Atlantic says it hasn't been in service since 1978. If you dial it > today, you'll get a recording saying it's not in service. But someone > seemed to be there on July 20, 1993. > At least is shows up in the list of phone records turned up by the > Senate Whitewater Committee's investigation of the aftermath of the > suicide of Vincent Foster. From the Tuesday discovery of the body > through the Friday funeral, First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was staying > at the Rodham household in Little Rock. The flurry of telephone calls > from the Rodham home included a call to the mysterious (202) 628-7087-ten > minutes at 10:41 p.m. Little Rock time on July 20. > The list includes calls to Maggie Williams and Susan Thomases, as > widely reported. Also to the Department of Justice Command Center > (Webster Hubbell, perhaps) and Carpinteria, CA, which is Harry Thomason. > There is also a 15-minute call on the 21st to someone staying at the > Sunnyside Lodge in Tahoe City, CA. But committee investigators are > especially stumped by the unidentified Washington number. > The indefatigable Sen. Lauch Faircloth displayed the number at the > hearings and suggested that since Ms. Thomases and Ms. Williams couldn't > explain it, perhaps Mrs. Clinton could. The first lady has not been > forthcoming, so anyone with information about the mystery number should > contact the Senator. Or fax us at (212) 416-2658, attention Editor. dannyb@panix.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My source believes that Bell Atlantic was in error in stating the number had not been in service since 1978. His belief is the number (at that time, in 1993) was a non-published number in the private living quarters of President and Mrs. Clinton at the White House, or perhaps in the bedroom of their daughter. He believes Bell Atlantic mistakenly said it had not been in service since 1978 because *billings had not been issued* on the number since that time; in other words it was a 'hunt-line' in a rotary hunt group and billed under some other number _*or*_ through clerical error had been turned on at some point, stood alone as its own number (in the President's living quarters) but the accounting department (from whence the most immediate and likely source of BA's answer in response to subpoena) had never been notified by 'plant' that the number was turned on. The White House account with Bell Atlantic is sufficiently complex -- with almost daily activity involving service turned on/off, new installs, service changes etc, that this seems plausible. In any event, he is reasonably certain the number was intended for the personal use of the president and his family in their private quarters. He believes the line was terminated -- or made an appearance -- on a button on a key phone in the family's second floor suite, plus an appearance on a button on a key phone in the president's office; and a third appearance on the main switchboard at the White House which functioned (for that line) as 'answering service'. He seemed rather amused at the implications in the 'what sort of person or agency would have a number telco will not acknowledge' message presented here. Rather than being any sort of massive plot -- although that remains to be seen with Whitewater generally -- in this instance it was probably some sloppy clerical work by BA either in reference to the number itself or in response to the subpoena asking for data. A mother/wife calling to say goodnight to a daughter/ husband perhaps? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lis Angus Subject: Canadian vs US Long Distance Rates Date: 12 Nov 1995 19:53:07 GMT Organization: Angus TeleManagement Group eross@terraport.net (Evan Ross) wrote: > ezx@ix.netcom.com (Ed Marion) wrote: >> For that matter, with NAFTA and all that, why does it cost about 25 >> cents per minute to call suburban Toronto from Houston during business >> hours, when it only costs 12 cents per minute to call Seattle which is >> 500 miles more distant? On 800 inbound, it is even worse ... 56 cents >> vs 16 cents. > If this could be explained, maybe this would tell me why Toronto to > Hamilton (about 40 miles) is C$0.34/minute (about US$0.25) during > business hours ... Two points: 1. Canadian ld basic rates continue to be higher than US rates (which is why the CRTC just ordered that the $2/mo increase in local rates be taken off basic long distance rates.) Canadian ld rates have come down considerably, but primarily on targeted programs for businesses and high-volume callers. 2. For some reason, rates for calls from the US to Canada (provided by AT&T & other US carriers) are now higher than calls from Canada to the US. The relationship between PRICES and COSTS in long distance charges is still far from close. The CRTC recently concluded, after a lengthy benchmarking exercise, that the COST of providing a long distance minute is virtually the same in the US and in Canada (comparing major Canadian telcos and US ld carriers -- primarily Bell Canada and AT&T). So PRICE differences must reflect other considerations. LIS ANGUS Tel: 905-686-5050 ext 221 Angus TeleManagement Group Fax: 905-686-2655 8 Old Kingston Road e-mail: lisangus@angustel.ca Ajax Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 http://www.angustel.ca ------------------------------ From: stvangel@ix.netcom.com (Steve) Subject: Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? Date: Sun, 12 Nov 1995 22:58:40 GMT Organization: Netcom I'm running into something wierd with my telco. I've been doing work on my Fax-On-Demand system, and I was submitting a lot of jobs to it. I used the same phone number for all of them ( my fax server ), but I had the system configured to assume my fax server was a long-distance number, because I didn't want the call to actually go through. The only problem was, the calls were working. The Telco was allowing a long-distance call to a local number! My Area-code is 314. My telco switch is 968. My Fax number is (314) 968-xxxx, which is a local call. I was dialing 1 314 968-xxxx, and the call was going through. Several Questions: I can think of two ways this worked. One being the local switch was stripping the 1 and the 314 and routing it right back to me. The other would be the number was going to the Long-distance provider, and then back to me. I'm leaning toward the Long-distance provider doing it because I can do it into another switch that is also local. Nobody can seem to tell me what kind of a switch the Telco has installed for 968. I get dead air when I ask the question to their support people. I'm wondering if this is something that works elsewhere. Does this charge me for a long distance call? If it's free, and works elsewhere, I'd like to be able to do that for all of my local calls. 314 has some numbers local & some long distance, and it would mean I don't have to keep track of which is which. Any information would be appreciated. Steve ------------------------------ From: jbuckingham@wynd.net Date: Sun, 12 Nov 95 20:01:22 -0800 Subject: This 500 Thing Is Getting Rediculous Reply-To: jbucking@callamerica.com I am writing to express my total frustration with the whole 500 number situation. Joseph's comments regarding MCI's service are just the latest. I can not see how this problem is ever going to go away unless we make 1- 500 work as called party pays (like 800). I can not see how 0-500 can ever work since no other carrier other than the owner of the 500 prefix can know how much to charge so they are forced to block the numbers. The way I see it 1- 500 is only going to work from private homes and some businesses. Who wants a locator number that does not work from payphones, hotels, most businesses and everywhere in between? I think we have created a useless product here folks. Can anyone think of a good reason to have 500 set up this way? Jeff Buckingham Call America, San Luis Obispo, CA E-mail: jbucking@callamerica.com Home Page: www.callamer.com MyLine Virtual Number: 805-545-5100 (Voice and Fax) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is not a question of 0-500 not working because 'other carriers do not know how much to charge' ... like 800 numbers are routed directly to the issuing carrier. The issuing carrier's operator is the person on the line asking for billing information (in the case of MCI) or else it is a computer asking (in AT&T's case). Futhermore, it is 1-500 that is getting blocked where blocking is done, because those truly are the ones which get billed to the phone without permission, etc. 0-500 always asks for billing advice, and never allows billing to the phone being used. Jeff, I can understand your prejudice in this matter in view of the perfectly wonderful 800 'MyLine' service your company operates; but its not the entire 500 scheme which is at fault; just those carriers which have not yet gotten it working correctly, as seems to be the case with MCI. I have one of each -- a 500 and a MyLine account -- and although I do prefer MyLine, I make good use of the 500 number as well. Actually, I have two 800 numbers, two 700 numbers, one 500 number, three Skokie local numbers, a number for my pager and one San Fransisco 'local' number which rings here. I may get a few more 800 numbers installed so Judith Oppenheimer and her clients can look at me with consternation. ... ummm .. you still have an ample-plenty supply of 800 numbers there for new MyLine customers don't you? Readers: Jeff Buckingham and Steve Betterly would like you to have a MyLine number if you don't already. You should get one now while 'genuine, original style' 800 numbers are still available. Don't wait until its too late and you get stuck with an 888 number. Write Steve for details. PAT] ------------------------------ From: BGOODIN@UNEX.UCLA.EDU (William R. Goodin) Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Intelligent Software Agents" Date: Sun, 12 Nov 1995 15:53:42 Organization: UCLA Extension On January 17-19, 1996, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Intelligent Software Agents", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Cindy Mason, PhD, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Henry Lieberman, PhD, MIT Media Laboratory, and Ted Selker, PhD, IBM Almaden Research Center. Agent technology is one of the fastest growing areas of computer and information science. Intelligent software agents are essential to manage the growing complexity and volume of information in our environment. Recently, agents have been created that can act on our behalf to sort electronic mail, navigate and retrieve information on the Internet, negotiate for resources, and schedule meetings. In the future, agents may navigate and drive automobiles, or perform shopping functions according to budget constraints and personal preferences. This course explores the design, implementation, and use of two types of computational agents: interface agents and collaborative agents. Interface agents support the learning and use of computer tools, such as operating systems. An interface agent can observe the actions taken by the user in the interface, learn new capabilities dynamically, suggest courses of action to the user, provide context-sensitive help, adapt the interface automatically to the user's personalized requirements, or automate tasks that would otherwise require tedious sequences of manual operations. The design of interface agents draws on representation, learning, and reasoning techniques used in other branches of artificial intelligence, but carefully integrates principles of good human-computer interaction. Collaborative agents interact and cooperate with other agents to perform tasks on behalf of a user. The design of collaborative agents involves problem solving, communication, and coordination strategies for agents to maintain autonomy, yet benefit from the network as a whole. Agent collaborations may involve heterogeneous or homogeneous groups of agents, and agents with similar or differing goals, languages, and knowledge representation facilities. Collaborative agent technology draws on principles of artificial intelligence, sociology, organizational theory, animal behavior, economics, and distributed systems. This course describes the utility of current and experimental software agents as assistants and advisors, as well as the technologies involved in their design. In addition, the course examines the social implications of software agents. Agents are discussed in the contexts of electronic mail, browsing the World Wide Web, digital libraries, graphical editors, and tutoring systems. Current agent software and preview future agent technology are also demonstrated. The course fee is $1295, which includes course materials. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 02:05:49 GMT From: Brian Tao Subject: Bell Canada and ISP's Hello all, I was informed that you may be interested in the following press release. The topic matter is the controversy surrounding Bell Canada's recently announced intention to hike their rates for Centrex service by up to 300%. The is widely seen as a move by Bell Canada to clear out the existing ISP business in Canada, just before they introduce their own WorldLinx service early next year. I am the system administrator for Internex Online, an Internet service provider with local dialup in the Toronto area. On Wednesday, November 15, 1995, Bell Canada cut the service to all our Centrex, ISDN and voice lines (close to 500 in all). Apparently, five other major ISP's across Canada suffered the same fate. They have resumed full service to our switchbox, but Bell's activities in recent weeks have been cause for alarm in the Canadian online community. >>>>> Montreal, November 9, 1995 --- A group of independent Quebec and Ontario Internet Service Providers (ISPs) says Bell Canada is threatening their economic survival by suddenly denying them access to additional Centrex lines that the public uses to access Internet gateways. Bell is attempting to force the ISPs to take a much more expensive form of access which will raise their rates by approximately 300%. Bell is taking this arbitrary step to raise the ISPs costs at precisely the moment that it is poised to launch its own Internet service. The ISPs, who after hundreds of thousands of corporate and residential consumers various Internet high speed access services, today said they intend to file a petition with the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) seeking immediate orders requiring Bell Canada to continue providing Centrex III service in accordance with the existing tariff. Failure to obtain this injunctive relief from the CRTC will likely mean significant rate hikes for all Internet users. Bell has been providing Centrex III lines to the ISPs, based on written agreements varying in duration from one to five years. The telephone lines link ISP customers with the Internet. Rory Olson, President of Accent Internet, a Montreal service provider, said Bell's unilateral action flies in the face of fair business practices. "Bell has knowingly serviced the providers and has, in fact, encouraged us to use Centrex III by entering long term agreements with them. Bell has also forced the ISPs to incur large up front installation costs to obtain this service. We are a fledgling industry and now that we have pioneered the technology and have developed the market at significant expense, Bell wants to take over. We are like ants about to be trampled by an elephant." Olson said it appears that Bell is attempting to become the Microsoft of the Canadian Internet market. "While Microsoft earned their position through ingenuity, technological advancements and groundbreaking developments, Bell is trying to assume its place on the backs of ISPs who have laboured long and hard to establish a market." The providers state that between October 26 and November 3, 1995, without prior notice. Bell Canada sales representatives in Quebec and Ontario began advising the ISPs orally that Bell would no longer provide them with access lines pursuant to its Centrex III tariff. The ISPs were advised that orders for additional Centrex lines would not be filled. Olson said the matter must be dealt with quickly. "Due to the urgency of this situation and the potentially devastating economic of Bell's arbitrary increases on ISP services, we will be asking the Commission to immediately deal with this matter. Any delay will simply advance Bell Canada's own position in the Internet access market by harming our businesses." Jean Louis Bouthillete, of Internet Login, said that some providers received a letter from Bell earlier this week acknowledging that a new policy on access line charges had been misinterpreted by Bell representatives. The letter further states that Bell will not increase rates on existing services for six months, but that they will begin charging the higher tariffs immediately on any new lines ordered. "This is all part of Bell's smoke screen. They somehow got wind of our strategy to go public and tried to diminish any announcement we would make. The facts remain clear. Without any prior notice, Bell started refusing to fill our Centrex orders, despite signed agreements and they want to apply new rates which will boost per line costs by up to 300%. Then we learn that Bell wants to launch its own Internet access service," said Bouthillete. Bouthillete added that unless Bell is forced to reverse its stance. the pubic will pay dearly. "Individual line rates will increase from $25 to $30 per month to as much as $90 monthly." Robert Quance, President of Metrix Interlink, said the ball will be placed squarely in the CRTC's court when the ISPs file an application early next week. "The Commission has decided on prior occasions that Bell Canada cannot arbitrarily discontinue a tariffed service. This was done in the case of 976 service providers. If Bell wants to discontinue a service they must first apply to the Commission. They have not even had the decency to give us, their customers, any prior notice." -- 30 -- THE INTERNET ACCESS MARKET A Brief Backgrounder In Quebec and Ontario: * Currently some 150 Internet Service Providers (lSPs). * A half million Internet users in both provinces: 300,000 subscribe to ISP services. * Growth has been in the order of 10% per week. In Quebec: * ISP companies employ close to 1,000 people full time, plus 450 part-time. * An additional 1,700 jobs are expected to be created during the next year. * $29 million invested in the industry to date by ISPs. A further investment of $40 million is expected over the next year. * Quebec ISPs have led the world in the development of French Internet services. Numerous francophone nations have turned to Quebec for guidance. <<<<< Brian Tao (BT300, taob@io.org) Systems Administrator, Internex Online Inc. ------------------------------ From: aresnik@execpc.com Subject: Sprint to Ignore *67? Date: 10 Nov 1995 15:22:40 GMT Organization: Exec-PC BBS - Milwaukee, WI I heard that Sprint has filed with the FCC to ignore *67 per call blocking on interstate long distance ... that would appear to be a direct violation of the FCC rules. Anybody know the details? ------------------------------ From: Bob Stone Subject: New Telecom Technology: Real-Time Fax/Voice-Mail on Data Net Date: 12 Nov 1995 17:52:14 GMT Organization: JT&T, Inc. If your interested in achieving maximum value on your investment in the enterprise data network, take a look at Terra Globe - Virtual Global System . Terra Globe is the world's first, truly global multimedia messaging solution. Terra Globe is voice-mail, fax-mail, and real-time fax packetized and transmitted across the data network. Your existing LAN/WAN provides the transparency for node connectivity at local, national, or international levels. No longer can stand-alone technologies, geographical separation of worksites, high international toll charges, or lack of computer literacy keep vital corporate information from flowing freely across the entire multi-location, multinational organization. Terra Globe brings the whole "corporate family" together under the umbrella of the enterprise data network. Normally the data network is used for data and e-mail, the media of the sophisticated users. With Terra Globe everyone in the corporation, including the non-sophisticated users whose media of choice is voice, voice-mail, and fax, gains the same benefits of low cost and high reliablity that the data network formally offered only to the experts. Visit our web page and learn more about Terra Globe. ------------------------------ From: lreeves@crl.com (Les Reeves) Subject: Oldest 1AESS Cuts (was: Re: Limits to Redialing?) Date: 12 Nov 1995 08:55:59 -0800 Organization: CR Labs Ed Ellers (edellers@shivasys.com) wrote: > (A side note: I was told by an AT&T person on comp.dcom.telecom.tech a > few months ago that the Succasunna 1ESS was replaced with a 5ESS a > couple years ago. That switch was designed to last forty years in > service; it remains to be seen if any 1ESSes will be in that long.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The first ESS in Chicago was on the > near north side in the Chicago-Superior office in 1972. Then the > downtown area was converted in a couple parts during 1974-75. It > was installed throughout the city by 1983. PAT] On Saturday, Nov. 11, the 1AESS in Peachtree Place in Atlanta, GA was cutover to a 5ESS. This switch was originally installed as a #1ESS in the second or third quarter of 1969. It was upgraded to a #1AESS in 1978. It has been in continuous operation since 1969. This was the first #1ESS installed in Atlanta. I believe it holds the record for longest continuous operation of a #1ESS in the US. Les lreeves@crl.com Atlanta,GA 404.874.7806 -- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #477 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 13 10:09:15 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA04841; Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:09:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 10:09:15 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511131509.KAA04841@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #478 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Nov 95 10:09:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 478 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Old Western Electric CPE (Ed Ellers) Re: RIP ISDN? GlobeSpan (ADSL) (Rupert Baines) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Steve Cogorno) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Philip Treuer) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Hugh H. Tebault) Re: The Killer Application Myth (Steve Schear) Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed (Steve Cogorno) Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed (Tony Harminc) Re: Limits to Redialing? (Duncan Campbell) Re: Limits to Redialing? (Chip Sharp) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: edellers@shivasys.com (Ed Ellers) Subject: Re: Old Western Electric CPE Date: 11 Nov 1995 23:20:48 GMT Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [Usenet News Server for hire] In article , mcuccia@law.tulane.edu says... > The 500 deskset was introduced in 1949. This was the first non-coin phone to > have the larger dial assembly- the dials themselves had been 3-inches, but > the 500 set had the ring with digits/letters around the outside of the dial, > making the full assembly 4.25 inches. The first models were, of course, > black, and had *metal* fingerwheels on the dials. The 554 was the wall > version which came out around 1954. Am I the only person who's seen an actual instruction book for a 500 phone? I saw an "antique phone" book today that mentioned that the ridges on the top of the 554 were to let you rest the handset there temporarily, but the author claimed that no one knew this because no instructions were available. However, when my family moved across town in 1970, we got a new (not reconditioned) 500 set, in its nice two-color-printed box, with a small instruction book that applied to all the single-line 500 series (desk and wall, rotary and Touch-Tone) which explained this and other items. (I didn't keep the instructions, though. Rats.) > Also about this time was the *color* 500 series phones. They were really > 'two-tone' models (and here I dont mean DTMF- but color ), with a black > dial assembly (the 'ring' around the dial was black along with the metal > fingerwheel). Some other parts were black as well -- I think that the cords > were black, but the handset might have been either black or the color of the > base -- I can't remember right now). Full color phones came out about a year > later, but the two-tone models were still being marketed as well -- but I > think that there was a lack of interest in the two-tone ones after full > solid color models came out. Also, the full color models had *plastic* > fingerwheels on the dials-but a *harder* plastic than used today. And the > center of an older plastic fingerwheel was open -- it didn't have the top > all covered up with the same molded plastic. These early plastic > fingerwheels had a grinding sound when the dial was spun, while later ones > were softer. These may simply have been painted, as were the older "colored" 302s and 200-series desk stands were; obviously you couldn't repaint the large dial circle because you'd cover the numbers. Some BOCs did this on a custom basis long before WECo started offering sets in different colors, which I believe occurred in 1954. > These phones were built to last for *years* -- they might have been heavy, > but they were *sturdy*. You could spin a dial without having the phone slide > all over the table. Even with touchtones today, I find that today's > ultralight platic phones still slide around when using them. You could use > older phones as a paperweight -- when writing down a phone number on a slip > of paper, you could put a corner of the paper under the part of the phone. One exception was the original version of the Princess set -- the one that used the external ringer. Those slid around quite readily when dialing, so WECo drastically redesigned the set to have both non-skid rubber on the base and a built-in ringer to add mass. (The built-in ringer, of course, made things a lot easier both for the customer and for installers, since the Princess finally could be installed just like a 500 set and could use normal plugs and jacks.) > Except for my cellular phone, the phones for my personal use (both at home > and here at work) are real Western Electric phones -- I have at least one of > most of the WE/Bell phones of the 1920's thru the 1960's described above. I > do have a pocket battery powered touchtone dialer for those times I want or > *have* to enter touchtones, however, since all of my personal use phones are > rotary dial. And these phones will also work on such digital offices as DMS, > #5ESS, even digital PBX's if the line is still an analog line. Hmmm ... why not just use some 2500 and/or 2554 sets with 12-key pads? (I do have some old WECo phones that still work just fine, but my personal favorite is the current AT&T Trimline 210/230. The 230 has a number memory, the 210 doesn't. No one claims that they could survive for 20 years in lease service as a 500 was designed to do, but they *are* quite well built and work very well.) ------------------------------ From: Rupert Baines Subject: Re: RIP ISDN? GlobeSpan (ADSL) Date: 11 Nov 1995 14:14:56 GMT [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The original message on this topic did not appear in the Digest. It appears to have come from the uk.telecom group. PAT] In article Malcolm Herring, mherring@cix.compulink.co.uk writes: > Subject: Re: RIP ISDN? GlobeSpan > From: Malcolm Herring, mherring@cix.compulink.co.uk > Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 11:11:15 GMT > I was NOT saying that telcos may not in the future sell a wideband > asymmetrical service. Indeed, in the UK, BT are busy trying to persuade > the government to let them sell Video-on-Demand. This would require a > very asymmetrical-bandwidth local loop and network. > My view is that the type of wideband service suitable for Internet usage > is more likely to come from cable TV operators as they already have > suitable infrastructure. Their networks are inherently asymmetrical and > they have wideband cabling in the ground. Their subscriber drops are very > short (<250m) and this makes possible very high bandwidth (~50MHz) > connections. True, but as the Cable Modems thread points out, there are some problems, which level the playing field a bit. 1) The Noise is horrifying ("Ingress"), which savages the data rate 2) The network they have is in worse condition and poorly maintained (perhaps 80% uptime vs >99.9% for telco ?) 3) The cable is common, so total BW is shared between all users - reducing BW per subscriber (perhaps not too important), coupling noise (a problem) and giving security worries. 4) Everyone hates the cable cos 5) The cable companies do not, in general, have loads of excess money. (Looked at the balance sheet of a Telco lately? How do you spell C A S H !) > Telcos would not install the necessary NETWORK on the basis of Internet > users alone (We are a tiny proportion of their customer base!), but would > do so for a much bigger market (Like Video-on-Demand). The existence of a > particular local loop technology does not imply the existence of a > matching network. When AT&T announced their Globespan/SDSL service, the > implication is that they can offer 384kbaud network connections (i.e. H0 > channels or 6xB Channels). This is great for video conferencing users but > will no doubt cost 6x toll charges! "Up to a point Lord Coper", Evelyn Waugh,Scoop To start with, most economic models I've seen show that *no* single app (VOD, Inet etc) makes sense, but that the combination of all of them might well do so. Internet may well make more sense than VOD from a charging point of view; the number of users is less, but so is the competition. Also I suspect the cost elasticity is better (look at the ISDN based services) And the whole attraction of ?DSL for the Telcos is the extent that they can leverage existing assets. If the loop rates go up, they can offer more services (as you say, at some cost per bit !), but I don't see that the network costs would go up significantly. After all, there *already* is an Internet infrastructure shared amongst all users. Any upgrades benefit all users, but those with big pipes benefit more. And those upgrades will be necessary no matter what the local access is (unless cable companies go into the long distance data business) Question. How overloaded is the backbone now? What upgrades will be required? Would cable companies have any advantages here? Rupert Baines Broadband Marketing Analog Devices ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 00:10:22 PST Josh Rubin said: > My query has probably already been covered in an FAQ somewhere, but > just in case, I'm wondering how a Telco could guarantee that any > particular call on an ISDN line would be digital. It strikes me that > unless you're in a closed system such as a university or corporation, > that they really couldn't gurantee it. The reason is that a number of > places still don't have fully digital networks. Actually, unless you are in podunk nowhere, nearly all calls travel over digital links. Once a traditional (analog) call reaches the central office, it is converted into a digital signal there and transmitted to other switching points digitally. I don't know exactly where you are, but I bet your Bell company has universal digital service. Pacific Bell (my RBOC) has digital services available thought the state. Some areas may not have ISDN, but switched digital (SDS 56K is basically the data componet of ISDN) has been available universally since the late 70's. If you concern is over long distance traffic, your IXC should already know that your line is ISDN provisioned. Actually, from a technical standpoint, your call CANNOT go through an analog line; the protocol will not be able to handle the signal loss from the conversion from digital to analog and back. More intuitively though, your central office switch will not open a non-digital path since ISDN (at least B service) is channel switched. Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 14:53:06 -0900 From: treuerpj@alaska.net (Philip Treuer) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Josh, I think you've asked a great question, and if you don't mind, I'd like to ask that you copy me with any good responses you get that aren't also posted on the Digest. (I asked a similar question no to long ago but never got much of a response.) I believe the answer to the question you've posed is "no" (Can a telco guarantee whether any particular call on an ISDN line will be digital?) In my state, Alaska, the two major interexchange carriers, AT&T Alascom and GCI, have indicated that they won't even carry a switched 56 or 64K ISDN call unless they can charge extra for the call -- which will require data users to dial special access numbers on interexchange calls. The only exception to this so far is that switched 56 calls to the lower 48 from Anchorage (the only community so far that has switched 56 service; ISDN is not available any where in the state) are transported intact and at no extra charge. Furthermore, these IXCs will only guarantee data transmission over their (intrastate) digital networks of 9.6 kbps for modem and fax users. In other words, there's no point getting a modem or fax faster than 9.6 kbps in Alaska if you plan to use it primarily for interexchange calls. This is because the IXCs compress multiple voice calls onto a single channel. The compression technique doesn't work as well for data calls. Anything faster than 9.6 will bite the dust (and in rural areas the problem is even worse). I've been told that there is special detection equipment that could be used to isolate the higher speed data traffic of modem and fax users; however GCI has asserted that installation of this equipment would increase its capital cost by 10%. In your example, you speculate about analog switches as the potential culprits. I believe that analog transmission or other non-fiber transmission facilities could also be potential drags on through-put, particularly in rural areas. In Alaska all local and interexchange switches are digital, however significant portions of the interexchange network are still analog. AT&T Alascom, which is the only IXC permitted to operate interexchange facilities statewide, still uses analog transmission to about 200 of the approximately 250 locations statewide. There is plenty of demand for switched 56 and ISDN in rural areas, but it makes little sense for LECs to offer these services locally if the interexchange network won't support it. Clearly Alaska is a special case, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's rural areas of the U.S. that have similar problems. I also wonder what the future holds in store for the rest of the U.S. as the nation's data requirements increase. My previous question that went unanswered sought information about whether the major IXCs also use compression on their fiber systems. It may be that they don't. However, will fiber bandwidth always be so inexpensive that the IXCs don't have to consider the efficiency associated with compressing voice calls. I've been told that its possible to transport a voice call with less than 10 kbps. Given that the standard uncompressed digital voice circuit is 64 kbps it seems that there's a lot of room for efficiency. If and when the IXCs decide to compress 3, 4 and 5 voice calls onto a single 64 kbps channel, will they still be willing to carry switched 56 and ISDN at no extra charge? In Alaska the answer has been "no." ------------------------------ From: Hugh H Tebault Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Date: 12 Nov 1995 20:30:27 GMT Organization: ascend.com If you request a service type of SW56 or SW64 over an ISDN facility, the only way to get to the other end is digital. If you are asking of you call with a service type of VOICE, then the telco MAY use analog circuits in some part of the path because they are only obligated to deliver you "Toll Quality voice" service and could actually use ADPCM (32kbs voice) to do this. Best is simply to use digital equipment, IDSN terminal adaptors, or equipment that includes the ISDN TA functions and provides routing and bridging functions like Ascend products. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 00:33:12 -0700 From: azur@netcom.com (Steve Schear) Subject: Re: The Killer Application Myth Christoph F. Strnadl wrote: > I have got one more comment to make concerning the non-existence of a > single killer application. > The one application (or idea therof) I have come across which may has > a fair chance to be eventually realised and become something like a > killer application could be the following: > Idea: Home ATM: > * phone with smartcard reader > * user has a stored value smartcard (aka electronic purse) > * user dials into his home-banking application somewhere on the > (POTS!!) network and transfers money from his bank account to > his electronic purse > This is not home-banking per se but, as a matter of fact, just one > single application of a possible home-banking package. It is, though, > a feature which to my opinion offers tremendous added value to the > user, don't you think? Might you have come across your "Killer Application" due to Philips having worked for some years on such instruments? I too have some familiarity with smart phones. I worked at Citicorp's TTI group in the late '80s and early '90s. As I recall, Citicorp was the 'inventor' of the Smart Phone (SP), later partnering with Philips for its manufacturing expertise. As you probably know, SP customer trials have not been resounding successes. The common telephone also had acceptance problems. Early in this century telephones were unable to find a place on the desk of U.S. business managers. The telephone was almost always on the desk of the secretary. Managers of that period were used to dealing face to face and observing a decorum of regarding the control of visitor access. Telephones succeeded in business only when the generation resisting them retired. Citicorp's reason for SPh was as a Trojan Horse to 'sneak' computer technology (in a familiar form) into the homes of older, upscale, customers whose VCRs have been blinking midnight for the past five years. Citicorp hoped that SPs would enable them to develop deeper relationships with these valued customers. It hasn't worked. Look at the demographics of those who use ATMs. Their mostly under 45. Those most comfortable with computer technology already have a home computer. Why would they want a SP? Their computers are connecting to on-line networks at a phenomenal rate. All they need to perform secure on-line transaction processing is a Smart Card and an inexpensive Smart Card reader attachment to their home PC. Both are now available. Most troubling to established banking companies is the spectre that with the advent of electronic purses, especially those from third parties, the need by many for banks (as we now know them) may disappear. Secure, anonymous, electronic payment methods (such as David Chaum's CyberCash) may well bring about a revoultion in world commerce at the expense of governmental authority. Steve Schear, N7ZEZ | Internet: azur@netcom.com Former Chairman | Part 15 Coalition | Voice: 655 West Evelyn Avenue | Voice: 1-510-657-1200 (U.S., messages) Suite 2-9326 | Cellular: Mountain View, CA 94041 | Fax: ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 01:09:04 PST Richard Eyre-Eagles said: >> For more info, call 1-800-NORTEL or contact me. > Did they run out of seven digit 800 numbers so they are assigning six > digits?? :) It's actually 1-800-4Nortel. Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 95 17:43:51 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: PowerTouch 350 Telephone Information Needed Peter_Polishuk@nt.com wrote, apparently in error: > For more info, call 1-800-NORTEL or contact me. Doubtless this six-digit number makes up for all those years Northern Telecom had the eight-digit one 1-800-NORTHERN. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: duncan@ivanova.punk.net (Duncan Campbell) Subject: Re: Limits to Redialing? Date: 13 Nov 1995 08:16:47 GMT Organization: Punknet Internet Cooperative, San Luis Obispo, CA Bren Smith wrote: > Is it true that the Demon Dialer disappeared because of LEC's limitations > on the number of times you can redial within a certain time period? (Pat's lengthy and informative reply snipped) The only limit on redialing I have ever run into was through an MCI calling card. I redialed my sister's line, which was busy, ten or twenty times in a minute or two. They stopped accepting calls billed to that calling card. Another fraud prevention algorithm gone awry ... Duncan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 01:23:18 EST From: hhs@teleoscom.com (Chip Sharp X-6424) Subject: Re: Limits to Redialing? Bren Smith wrote: > Is it true that the Demon Dialer disappeared because of LEC's > limitations on the number of times you can redial within a certain > time period? The FCC Part 68 regulations have restrictions on the number of times equipment can redial automatically without human intervention. Many countries have similar restrictions. Hascall H. ("Chip") Sharp Teleos Communications, Inc. Sr. Systems Engineer 2 Meridian Road Eatontown, NJ 07724 USA voice: +1 908 544 6424 fax: +1 908 544 9890 email: hhs@teleoscom.com web: http://www.teleoscom.com/ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #478 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 14 18:02:42 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id SAA06365; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 18:02:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 18:02:42 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511142302.SAA06365@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #479 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Nov 95 18:02:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 479 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Reality Ccheck re Toll Free NPRM (Judith Oppenheimer) Using Cellular Phones to Link Classroom to Outside World (Nigel Allen) AT&T Cutbacks Affect Customer Service (John Thompson) Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? (Corey Hauer) Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming (Scott Drown) FITCE Congress 1996 (Dominic Pinto) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. The "Information Appliance"- A Telecom Point of View? (Robert Jacobson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judith Oppenheimer Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 08:55:40 -0500 Subject: Reality Check re Toll Free NPRM Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) Toll Free Service Access Codes ) CC Docket No. 95-155 RESPONSE OF INTERACTIVE CALLBRAND Interactive CallBrand, a small telecommunications consulting firm in New York, submits this response on behalf of itself and similarly situated small businesses, users whose revenues are dependant on toll-free numbers. I. THE PUBLIC RESOURCE ARGUMENT DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE RECOGNITION OF LEGITIMATE USER INTERESTS. There is only one thing wrong with the Public Resource argument, as set forth in the NANP. It isn't that it's a bad policy, not at all. It's an admirable policy, a policy that was a model for it's time. There is, as we said, only one thing wrong with it. It's built on a misstatement of fact. That is, a statement of fact which was true at the time but that is no longer true, today. The statement is: All telephone numbers are the same. The North American Numbering Plan is an elegant creature, which became, not only the model, but the standard, throughout the world. Many of the people commenting in this proceeding are people who were present at the inception of the plan, in every sense of the word, and presided over its growth. Those who were part of developing it have every right to be proud of what they have done. But let us be frank. Where there is pride, there is always the desire to protect; to keep this elegant creature free from outside interference and, especially from the dreaded forces of commercialization. Is there anyone reading this document who seriously doubts the ability of ICB or anybody else, given a reasonable fact finding process, to demonstrate beyond any existing burden of proof, that , in commercial reality, there is no business application imaginable in which all numbers are the same? II. THE GROWING IMPORTANCE OF LEGITIMATE USER INTERESTS Worse yet, this is the issue that is not going to go away. Not only is it not going to go away, there are irresistible forces driving it as we speak. The first is the growth of telecommunications itself. The more numbers a consumer dials, the more different telephones he uses, the more services of which he takes advantage, the more he depends on numbers he can remember. He doesn't know he's twisting the numbering plan into something it wasn't designed to do. He thinks he's functioning efficiently. The second is the popularity and versatility of vanity number-like applications. You can't sell things or raise money or run for office -- or even get tried for murder -- without a toll free number. The quicker it's going to go by on the TV screen, the more competitors it has for attention, the more it needs to be the one remembered the next morning. Do you think this is going to change? How successful, generally, are democracies in reversing behavior that makes life easier, is cheap, harmless and healthy and thrills the marketing Vice President of every organization in the world? Finally, there's portability. Location/geographic portability snips the last wire linking the subscriber's number to the numbering plan. The customer is left holding in his hand, guess what, his very own telephone number that he can take with him wherever he goes his whole life. I-XXX-JohnDoe. Are you going to stop portability? III. IT IS AN ISSUE WHICH SHOULD NOT BE ADDRESSED, PREMATURELY, IN THIS PROCEEDING WHICH IS LIMITED TO THE ISSUE OF REPLICATION. Complicated and fraught with peril as this issue is, obviously what is needed is careful thought and sober consideration. The most harmful thing this forum could do to users would be to make any premature pronouncements one way or another. We have a business that is dependant on that telephone number. When you tell us you're going to make changes that effect it, we get nervous. Moreover, the whole point of this whole enterprise is to encourage us to take this number and use it as creatively and productively as possible. Are we not correct that is what you want? Well, you can't have it both ways. You can't say, on the one hand, invest in this. And then, on the other, say as publicly as possible, that this number is so ephemeral and absolutely beyond your control that your accountant says you'd have to be an idiot to rely on it. Not only your accountant, your lawyer will help him double team you. Is this what you want? It would be like trying to get pregnant women to smoke cigarettes. The point is that the only thing at issue here is replication. This is not about the question of whether or not anybody owns anything. Nobody yet knows the answer to that question and it certainly won't, finally, be settled by this proceeding. Accordingly, it would be inappropriate for this proceeding to address the issue. POSITIONS l. This rulemaking is not addressing the issue of whether or not anybody owns anything and should explicitly so state. 2. Replication is entirely appropriate as an accommodation to the legitimate interests of users. 3. As replication is an accommodation to users, it is users which should have the ability to initiate and confirm the process, not the RespOrgs. Judith Oppenheimer, President Interactive CallBrand(TM): Strategic Leadership, Competitive Intelligence Producer@pipeline.com. Ph: +1 800 The Expert. Fax: +1 212 684-2714. Interactive CallBrand (ICB) is a leading source of information and support on 800 and related issues. ICB publishes inTELigence, the telecom users' newsletter that separates fact from fiction. Call or email for a sample issue, and subscription information. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 02:11:09 -0500 From: Nigel Allen Subject: Using Cellular Phones to Link Classroom to Outside World Organization: Internex Online A Florida cellular company is helping a school in Fort Myers use cellular phones to link classrooms with the outside world. It's a cute idea, although I suspect most schols need other things a lot more than they need cellular phones. Still, I suppose anything that increase school-parent communication has some value. Here is the press release from Palmer Wireless, Inc., which I found on the PR Newswire web site (http://www.prnewswire.com/). CELLULAR ONE OF LEE COUNTY AND EDGEWOOD RENAISSANCE ACADEMY CELEBRATE SUCCESS OF CLASSLINK FORT MYERS, Fla., Oct. 24 /PRNewswire/ -- Students, parents, and teachers at Edgewood Renaissance Academy got the chance yesterday to tell Congressman Porter Goss, Lee County School Superintendent Bobbie D'Alessandro, and two members of the Lee County School Board how ClassLink, a concept that links the classroom via cellular phones to the outside world, has changed their lives for the better. "It really makes my day when I pick up the phone and hear a little tiny voice say 'Mommy I got a hundred on my spelling test'," said Parent Susan Case. "It's a real boost to my daughter's self-esteem and she has all day to look forward to that chocolate chip cookie I'm gonna bake her because she got a good grade." Parent Tammy Baughn likes the security she feels knowing that her three children are just a cellular phone call away. "My son Jeremy has asthma and allergy problems, so I am very relieved to know that if he has an attack then the teacher would be able to call for help directly. Normally, the teacher would have to call the office and then someone in the office would call for help." Baughn also said that she will probably not hesitate to let her children go on school field trips without her now, since teachers will have their cellular phones in case of emergency. In August, Cellular One of Lee County, owned by Palmer Wireless, Inc. (Nasdaq: PWIR), donated fifty-five cellular phones with accessories, air time for the 1995-96 school year, two personal digital assistants for wireless data applications, and cellular voice mailboxes for teachers and support staff at Edgewood. Every teacher has his or her own cellular voice mailbox called the "Homework Hotline", for communicating homework and other class information as well as for communicating with parents, students, other teachers, etc. Parents really like the voice mailbox feature of ClassLink which makes teachers more accessible -- even on weekends. "I was really impressed recently when a teacher returned my call within a couple of hours on a Saturday," said Case. "My son was having some speech problems and a few hours later the teacher called to let me know he could be enrolled in a speech class." In the 45 minute presentation held in front of the school yesterday, students and teachers also demonstrated how to call voice mail (Homework Hotline) and played some of the messages left by students and their parents. Laura Henning, a first grade teacher, lets her students record the homework for the week. "When they are selected to leave their voice on the Homework Hotline it increases their self-esteem," Henning said. "It also makes parents and other students keep up with the homework because they're calling the Hotline in order to hear their child's voice or the voice of a classmate," Henning added. Paula Barnes, a 5th grade teacher, uses the phone for behavior modification, positive reinforcement, and to increase productivity. "When I get to school in the morning and on my breaks, I use the phone to make several calls without leaving my room," said Barnes. "This enables me to get a lot more accomplished during the day." Congressman Goss urged the students to learn as much as they could about technology and he applauded Cellular One of Lee County and the Edgewood Renaissance Academy for participating in the ClassLink initiative. After the demonstration, Officer David Webster instructed students about safety and when they should call 9-1-1. Students practiced calling 9-1-1 on cellular phones then showed Congressman Goss what they had learned. Cellular One of Lee County and Edgewood Renaissance Academy became the first in the state and the fourth in the nation to launch ClassLink. The wireless industry created ClassLink in response to a challenge by House Speaker Newt Gingrich to bring modem communications technologies into the schools. The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association has committed to helping break down the walls of the classroom and improve education in 100 schools across the United States. Palmer Wireless, Inc., headquartered in Ft. Myers, Florida, operates 13 nonwireline cellular systems in Florida, Alabama and Georgia serving a total estimated population of 2.6 million with over 155,000 subscribers. All of the company's systems are Cellular One affiliates and members of the North American Cellular Network. For the 1996-97 school year, Palmer Wireless, Inc. will select one school in Alabama and one in Georgia to participate in ClassLink. Any schools interested in applying should write to: Palmer Wireless, Inc., Marketing--ClassLink, 12800 University Dr., Suite 500, Ft. Myers, FL 33907. CONTACT: Valerie Thompson, Public Affairs Associate, 941-432-5631, or Margaret Osborne, Vice President of Marketing, 941-433-8237 both of Cellular One; or Catherine Witt, Edgewood Principal, 941-334-6205 ------------------------------ From: John Thompson Subject: AT&T Cutbacks Affect Customer Service Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:59:45 -0500 Organization: Monmouth Internet Corporation I recently called AT&T Residential Customer Service (1-800-222-0300), and got a recording stating their hours of operation (7am - 9pm EST Mon-Sat). I knew that AT&T would be cutting back, but this seems quite a bit drastic. In the recording, it listed an "emergency" number (1-800-451-3231). The person that answered that number seemed to help, even if there wasn't an "emergency", but I'm annoyed that I can't call them at night, or all day Sunday without calling an "emergency" number. The world does not work on an 8am to 9pm schedule. Has AT&T forgotten that? But, what really ticks me off is this: call 1-800-CALL-ATT at 4am. Follow the prompts to select the "sign-up for AT&T" option. A representative will answer immediately. So, you can sign up 24 hours a day, but once you need to talk to customer service, they basically say "screw you". I have switched my long distance to MCI. Besides 24 hour customer service, I can access my account on the 'Net (soon, anyway). I will be switching my 800 number from AT&T too. They don't deserve my business if they won't provide me with 24-hour customer service. And no $15 check is going to change that! John Thompson jthompson@monmouth.com ------------------------------ From: hauer@deskmedia.com (Corey Hauer) Subject: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 01:43:42 GMT Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. I am providing internet service to several communities in a rural area. A very-small community serviced by GTE near one of my POPs is a long distance call from me but a local call to another GTE-serviced community that can call me without a long-distance charges. I want to enable people in the small town to call my service without long-distance charges. Maybe mistakenly, I called GTE and asked them if I could get a line in the community and have it forwarded to my main number. GTE told me "no way, that would be violating the tariff". I know of many ISPs and BBSs that use call forwarding in the same manner to extend their service area. Is GTE correct, would I be violating a tariff. What could happen if I had a friend of mine in this town get a line pointing to me? Or is GTE blowing smoke? Corey hauer@deskmedia.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are two considerations here, one being the legality of what you propose; the second being the practical or pragmatic side. Strictly speaking, schemes to avoid payment of toll are illegal. A 'scheme' is any plan which has not been tariffed. Since Foreign Exchange service years ago was tariffed, therefore using it to avoid toll charges was not illegal. Call forwarding on the other hand is tariffed as a way to conveniently have your telephone calls reach you wherever you may be, not as a way to string phone calls together in a way to avoid or bypass local calling areas, etc. Therefore when used in the latter way deliberatly, it becomes illegal. If this result is only coincidental to the reason you are using call forwarding, i.e. a convenient way to have your phone calls reach you, then it is not illegal. A reasonable person might conclude that a call forwarding link left permanently in place was not being done so much for the convenience of the subscriber in receiving his calls (after all, is the subscriber always in the same remote place which 'just happens to coincidentally' extend outside the local calling zone of the persons placing the calls) as it was being doen as a method of toll-avoidance, thus it was being done illegally. A couple of telcos have had the bright idea in the past of handling call forwarding much like the cell carriers handle 'follow me roaming'; that is they say 'since you may have forgotten to unlink your call forwarding and because we want to help you avoid unneccessary charges as a result of the forwarding being left up in error we will automatically unlink it for you every day at 3:00 AM if it has not been up less than an hour or so at that point. (i.e. you chislers will have to get out of bed at 2:30 AM each day and institute a fresh call forwarding link within a few minutes before 3:00 AM each day, otherwise we will pull it down and make you set it up again the next day or whenever you notice it is down and you have lost a lot of calls to your BBS or Internet server or whatever that we are not supposed to listen to and therefore cannot prove otherwise that you are skirting the tariff on.) So legally speaking, it is a very grey area. Subscribers play games, and telcos play games. The practical or pragmatic aspects of what is proposed is another matter. The only time 'chain forwarding' to avoid toll becomes less expensive than simply paying the long-haul toll is when there are unlimited local districts right next to each other. If you live in an area like Chicago, where you are billed three to five cents every time you pick up the phone to make a call, then rarely will the cost of a call from A --> C cost more than the costs of a call from A -> B plus B -> C combined. Generally the short links added together (and after all, you pay your total telecom bill, not just the separate links) will wind up costing more. Don't forget to add in the cost of *installing* the intermediate phone line and the cost of its monthly billing for network access, etc. Generally you need to have that incoming line really packed -- in use continually with the most favorable local calling plans on both sides of the link in effect -- in order to amortize the fixed expenses of the link itself. Even then it is quite 'iffy'. BBS operators and ISP's who want to provide the essence of a local phone call to their users are probably as well off or better off using an 800 number. Remember, most call forwarding links only allow one call at a time to get thorugh (additional callers get a busy signal) while 800 numbers are usually only limited in what they can pass at a time by the capacity of the receiving end to accept the call. Plus, you get non-blockable 'caller id' (really ANI) for security and control purposes on your network, and frankly, it just does not look quite so klutzy as some call-forwarded lines strung together. If you are saying you don't want to have to cover the entire cost of the call yourself (as you would with an 800 number) and want the user to have some of the expense (as he would if he paid for a local call to the call-forwarding link and you paid for the call from that point forward) then bear in mind the two of you together will probably wind up paying more (in total) than either of you would pay if one end or the other paid for the whole thing (either he dialed direct and paid the toll or he dialed your 800 number and you paid the toll.) Consider having an 800 number for 'authorized' users (i.e. those users who have agreed to pay you some sum of money per month for the use of your 'toll-free line' while the rest of the users simply dial direct at their own expense. Now the user gets to make the choice: is sending you some sum of money in exchange for using your 800 number to his advantage or not? Compuserve does this now. Either dial into them at your own expense (albiet they do have a lot of 'local access numbers') or use the 800 number and pay them six or eight dollars per hour. The customer does it however he thinks it works out best. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Scott Drown Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 12:43:33 EST Subject: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming Hi, I just got off the phone with the Cell-One/Boston service representative. I tried to make a call over the weekend, and my phone wouldn't work. I seems that I had crossed out of the Cell-One/Boston area, and was roaming. Why wouldn't the call go through? I've roamed before in that area? It seems that Cell-One/Boston has summarily DISABLED ROAMING on ALL phones that have not roamed in the past XXX days. The helpful service person did not know how long XXX was. He did inform me that this move was to combat massive fraud in roaming. I had tried to make a call to tell friends that I would be late, as the road was closed due to a car burning in the middle lane. It is a good thing that I was not trying to call for help for that driver (the FD was already there), as the State Police in NH have a 800 number for emergency cellular calls, not 911 or *911. It's a good thing that NYNEX pay phones are plentiful. :-) I asked the Cell-One person why they didn't tell me beforehand that they were going to do this. He assured me that a notice would be in my next billing statement, and all I have to do is call and ask for roaming to be turned on. If you are a Cell-One/Boston customer, and you might want to roam, you might want to call and have them turn roaming back on. Scott Drown Phone:+1-617-238-6390 Annex Software Quality Assurance Phone:+1-800-225-3317 Xylogics Inc, 53 Third Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803 Fax:+1-617-272-2618 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for passing along this warning. Like Sprint, with calling cards summarily disabled under some policy that no one seems to understand for sure or will talk about if they do, these folks take the attitude that they are accountable to no one but themselves don't they? Far too often, telcos like other large corp- orations seem to forget that customers are not an interupption to their work, they are the *purpose* of it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Pinto, Dominic Subject: FITCE Congress 1996 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 16:20:00 GMT The Federation of Telecom Engineers in the EC (FITCE) is a European Union wide professional body linking engineers and managers within the European telecommunications industry - with partcipation from the competinmg PTOs, manufacturing industry, value added services suppliers, as well as the traditional PTTs. Our last annual Congress, held in Bologna, Italy, September 11th - 16th, took the theme of Telecommunications Management. with some 36 papers being presented covering a wide range of issues and topics. Whether or not members of FITCE, all professionals in the industry are welcome to attend and participate. Further details about the group are available from Paul Nichols ph +44 171 356-8022, or fax +44 171 356-7942. I am the UK delegation organiser - registration and congress program details will be available from me (Dominic Pinto ph +44 171 356-5112, e-mail: dominic.pinto@itu.ch, and fax +44 171 356-6482,) but not until well into 1996. Best wishes, Dominic FEDERATION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY (FITCE) 35th European Telecommunications Congress CALL FOR PAPERS Multimedia is the new buzzword in telecommunications. Its roots are in computers, telecommunications and information providers. All three areas are now converging into a single market. Personal computers become TV sets and play audio compact disks; telephones include video cameras and modems; broadcasting is evolving to video on demand and becoming interactive. The digital coding of video signals is allowing bandwidth to be reduced and new applications to be created. What is multimedia really, and where is it heading? Who needs multimedia, who makes it, who controls and influences it, and who is influenced by it? Is it really the growing market for the future? Which standards will succeed? What is the content that will determine the new services? The 35th FITCE Congress, which will be held in Vienna, Austria, from 27 August-1 September 1996, will focus on: `Multimedia Services on the Telecommunications Networks of Europe' FITCE is inviting papers on this topic, covering one or more of the following aspects: l broadband networks and broadband access (FITL, ADSL, HFC, ATM, etc.); l video on demand and interactive video; l requirements for multimedia servers; l regulatory issues concerning multimedia (ONP and interconnection); l field trials on multimedia and experiences in Europe; l multimedia standardisation (B-ISDN, MPEG, MHEG, ODA, etc.); l multimedia applications in science, education, health care, publishing and others; l multimedia market forecast and evolution; l human factors and social impacts of multimedia. Guidelines for submission of papers: If you are interested in submitting a presentation, please prepare an abstract, which should be in English, giving a clear indication of the theme and coverage of the proposed paper. The abstract, which should be prepared on the standard FITCE form, should be sent before 13 February 1996 to: Paul Nichols, FITCE UK Papers Coordinator, Post Point G012, 2-12 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7AG (Telephone: (0171) 356 8022; Facsimile: (0171) 356 7942). Copies of the FITCE standard form are available from the above address, and will be sent on request. Papers should be unpublished. The abstracts will be reviewed by the International Papers Selection Committee for relevance, technical content and originality. Authors will be informed by 15 April 1996 whether their proposed paper has been selected for presentation. The full text of the selected papers, in English, is required by 15 June 1996 and should allow for a 25 minute presentation, which should be supported by slides. Requirements for special presentation equipment should be indicated in the abstract. ------------------------------ From: cyberoid@u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) Subject: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? Date: 13 Nov 1995 08:47:18 GMT Organization: Worldesign Inc., Seattle Lately, all the talk in the computer industry -- and at Comdex this week -- has been about the "Information Appliance," a concept recently given wide publicity by Oracle CEO Larry Ellison and Sun CEO Scott McNealy. In a nutshell, the information appliance is a small device with a big screen, a keyboard, and the ability to call up programs and data from a big server(s) somewhere on the Net. The idea is to get as much stuff off the local platform as possible, to hold down the cost and produce a simple tool capable of email, wordprocessing, Net surfing, and graphics/sound display. Period. The microwave oven of communications. So far the concept has been severely criticized in the computer industry, mostly by people who need 1GB of memory on their hard drive just to sleep at night. No one from the telecom industry has yet spoken out on the matter. In fact, when I was touting the idea back in 1989 (and right up to today), the reaction from telecom executives has been, "Huh?" Yet the concept will not fly without a big pipe between the servers and the end users. If the telecom industry is serious about getting big pipes down to the little folks, this is one hell of a good reason for doing so. So ... where's the response? Bob Jacobson Worldesign Inc. Seattle [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you propose is a very interesting idea and one that some of us have used for years and years already. For example, much of what I do on this Digest and the Archives is accomplished with nothing more than a Wyse-50 terminal, a printer attached and a 9600 baud modem. I let the ISP (in this case, LCS at MIT) keep all the software and storage on their end. I dial in, and run all the scripts from there. Now I could use a new terminal as this one is getting sort of cranky and a faster 28.8 baud modem in case anyone would like to donate them to the Digest (hint! hint!) and a new printer instead of one that is twelve years old (Epson MX-80) wouldn't hurt either, but the bottom line is people do not need to be computer literate with massive amounts of computational equipment to use the net and benefit from the many things it has to offer. I also have an old 386 sitting here which does not even have enough memory in it to run Windows, but I make do (somehow). I'd like to see something like your information appliance be mass-produced in sufficient quantity that every single person in America could afford one. I'd like to see the same push for universal service which drove the telcos in the early years of this century now become a driving force on the Internet. The Illinois State Lottery was up to some outrageous amount a few weeks ago. Somewhere around forty million or sixty million dollars. The way I can tell how large the pot has grown is by observing the size of the line as it snakes from the lottery agent at the corner store out the door and down the sidewalk, people waiting patiently in line for the chance to give their money away to someone else. I guess I live in a dream world of my own. If I were to win a lotterly like that I would see to it that that every public school and every public library in Chicago was hooked to the net immediatly with 'information appliance' type devices. Oh well, I can dream I guess. But indeed, you can do a lot with very little, and that may be the way most people eventually get 'wired and on line'. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #479 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 14 19:14:31 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id TAA11073; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 19:14:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 19:14:31 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511150014.TAA11073@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #480 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Nov 95 19:14:30 EST Volume 15 : Issue 480 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Table of Intercity and International Dialing Prefixes (Toby Nixon) Cellphones Cause Accidents? (Ron Bean) AT&T Fires Its First Shot? (Paul L. Moses) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Bob Goudreau) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (C. Weisgerber) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Toby Nixon Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 15:16:23 PST Subject: Table of Intercity and International Dialing Prefixes Here is the latest version of this table, which I submitted recently to the ITU for publication in the Operational Bulletin and on www.itu.ch. --Toby Table of Intercity and International Dialing Prefixes This table lists the intercity and international dialing prefixes for all countries in the world. It is intended as an aid to producers of computer software and devices which must be able to dial telephone calls from any country. It may also serve as an aid to international travelers. This table is sorted in ascending numeric order by the country codes assigned in ITU-T Recommendation E.164. The Intercity Dialing Prefix is the digit or digits which must be dialed before a city (or area) code when dialing a call to a city or area other than the one from which the call is being placed. If the entry in this column is blank for a particular country, it means that country has a single nationwide numbering plan that does not use city codes; all calls to anywhere in the country are dialed by using the entire "local" number. In some countries, the Intercity Dialing Prefix is traditionally treated as part of the city code. For the purposes of this table, a digit or digits that occurs at the beginning of all city codes in a country is considered to be an Intercity Dialing Prefix, instead of part of the city code, when that digit or digits is omitted when calling into the country from another country. For example, the city code for central London, England, is normally stated as "0171" inside the United Kingdom, but when it is dialed from the United States of America, the "0" is omitted (US callers would dial "011-44-171..." instead of "011-44-0171...". The International Dialing Prefix is the digit or digits which must be dialed before a country code when dialing a call to a country other than the one from which the call is being placed. If the entry in this column is blank for a particular country, it means that country does not facilitate the direct dialing of calls to other country (in other words, international calls must be placed through an operator). The letter "W", when appearing in a prefix, indicates that it is necessary to wait for a second dial tone before proceeding with dialing. This table contains information available as of the date of publication. Readers of this document discovering errors or omissions in any aspect should send notice of the need for correction to the editor. The editor of the document is: Toby Nixon Microsoft Corporation One Microsoft Way Redmond, Washington 98052-6399, USA Email: Internet: tnixon@microsoft.com X.400: c=us; a=mci; p=msft; s=tnixon Fax: +1 (206) 936-7329 Telex: 160520 Microsoft BVUE Voice: +1 (206) 936-2792 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ E.164 Intercity International Country Country Dialing Dialing Code Prefix Prefix ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Anguilla 1 011 1 Antigua 1 011 1 Bahamas 1 0011 1 Barbados 1 011 1 Bermuda 1 011 1 British Virgin Islands 1 011 1 Canada 1 011 1 Cayman Islands 1 011 1 Dominica 1 011 1 Dominican Republic 1 011 1 Grenada 1 011 1 Jamaica (1) 1 011 1 Montserrat 1 011 1 Nevis 1 011 1 St. Kitts 1 011 1 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1 0 1 Trinidad and Tobago 1 01 1 Turks and Caicos Islands 1 0 1 Barbuda 1 011 1 Puerto Rico 1 011 1 Saint Lucia 1 011 1 United States of America 1 011 1 United States Virgin Islands 1 011 20 Egypt 0 00 212 Morocco 0 00 213 Algeria 00 216 Tunisia 0 00 218 Libya 00 220 Gambia 00 221 Senegal Republic 0 00 222 Mauritania 00 223 Mali 00 224 Guinea 00 225 Ivory Coast 00 226 Burkina Faso 00 227 Niger 00 228 Togo 00 229 Benin 00 230 Mauritius 00 231 Liberia 0 232 Sierra Leone 00 233 Ghana 00 234 Nigeria 009 235 Chad 15 236 Central African Republic 19 237 Cameroon 00 238 Cape Verde Islands 0 239 Sao Tome and Principe (2) 00 240 Equatorial Guinea 00 241 Gabon 00 242 Congo 00 243 Zaire 00 244 Angola 0 00 245 Guinea-Bissau 099 246 Diego Garcia 00 247 Ascension Island 01 248 Seychelle Islands 00 249 Sudan 0 00 250 Rwanda 00 251 Ethiopia 0 00 252 Somalia 19W 253 Djibouti 00 254 Kenya 0 000 255 Tanzania 0900 256 Uganda 0 00 257 Burundi 90 258 Mozambique 00 260 Zambia 0 00 261 Madagascar 16 262 Reunion Island 19 263 Zimbabwe 1 110 264 Namibia 0 09 265 Malawi 101 266 Lesotho 00 267 Botswana 00 268 Swaziland 00 269 Mayotte Island 10 269 Comoros 10 27 South Africa 0 09 290 St. Helena 01 291 Eritrea 0 00 297 Aruba 00 298 Faeroe Islands 009 299 Greenland 009 30 Greece 0 00 31 Netherlands 0 00 32 Belgium 0 00 33 France (3) 16W 19W 33 Monaco 16W 19W 34 Spain 9 07W 350 Gibraltar 00 351 Portugal 0 00 352 Luxembourg 00 353 Ireland 0 00 (4) 354 Iceland 00 355 Albania 0 00 356 Malta 00 357 Cyprus (5) 0 00 358 Finland (6) 9 990 359 Bulgaria 0 00 36 Hungary 06W 00 370 Lithuania 8 810 371 Latvia 8 00 372 Estonia 82 810 373 Moldova 8 810 374 Armenia 8 810 375 Belarus 8 810 376 Andorra 00 378 San Marino 0 00 (7) 380 Ukraine 8 810 381 Yugoslavia 0 99 385 Croatia 0 00 386 Slovenia 0 00 387 Bosnia and Herzegovina 0 00 389 Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 0 00 39 Italy 0 00 (8) 39 Vatican City 0 00 40 Romania 0 00 41 Switzerland 0 00 41 Liechtenstein 0 00 42 Czech Republic 0 00 42 Slovak Republic 0 00 43 Austria 0 00 44 United Kingdom 0 00 45 Denmark 00 46 Sweden 0 009 47 Norway (9) 095 48 Poland 0 00 49 Germany 0 00 500 Falkland Islands 0 501 Belize 0 00 502 Guatemala 0 00 503 El Salvador 0 504 Honduras 00 505 Nicaragua 0 00 506 Costa Rica 00 507 Panama 0 508 St. Pierre and Miquelon 19W 509 Haiti 00 51 Peru 0 00 52 Mexico 91 (10) 98 (11) 53 Cuba 0 119 53 Guantanamo Bay 0 00 54 Argentina 0 00 55 Brazil 0 00 56 Chile 0 00 57 Colombia (12) 9 90 58 Venezuela 0 00 590 Guadeloupe 19W 590 French Antilles 19W 591 Bolivia 0 00 592 Guyana 0 001 593 Ecuador 0 00 594 French Guiana 19W 595 Paraguay 0 00 596 Martinique 19W 597 Suriname 00 598 Uruguay 0 00 599 Netherlands Antilles 0 00 60 Malaysia 0 007 (13) 61 Australia 0 0011 61 Cocos-Keeling Islands 0 00 62 Indonesia 0 001 63 Philippines 0 00 64 New Zealand 0 00 65 Singapore 005 (14) 66 Thailand 0 001 670 Saipan Island 1 011 670 Rota Island 1 011 670 Tinian Island 1 011 671 Guam 011 672 Christmas Island 0 00 672 Australian Antarctic Territory 0 00 672 Norfolk Island 0101 673 Brunei 0 00 674 Nauru 115 675 Papua New Guinea 05 676 Tonga 00 677 Solomon Islands 00 678 Vanuatu 00 679 Fiji Islands 05 680 Palau 00 681 Wallis and Futuna Islands 19W 682 Cook Islands 00 683 Niue 00 684 American Samoa 00 685 Western Samoa 0 686 Kiribati Republic 09 687 New Caledonia 00 688 Tuvalu 00 689 French Polynesia 00 690 Tokelau 00 691 Micronesia 011 692 Marshall Islands 0 00 7 Russia 8 810 7 Kazakhstan 8 810 7 Kyrgyzstan 8 810 7 Tajikistan 8 810 7 Turkmenistan 8 810 7 Uzbekistan 8 810 81 Japan 0 001 82 Korea (Republic of) 0 001 84 Vietnam 0 00 850 Korea (North) 00 852 Hong Kong 001 853 Macau 00 855 Cambodia 0 00 856 Laos 14 86 China 0 00 871 INMARSAT (Atlantic-East) 00 (15) (16) 872 INMARSAT (Pacific) 00 873 INMARSAT (Indian) 00 874 INMARSAT (Atlantic-West) 00 880 Bangladesh 0 00 886 Taiwan (Republic of China) 0 002 90 Turkey 0 00 91 India 0 00 92 Pakistan 0 00 93 Afghanistan 0 00 94 Sri Lanka 0 00 95 Myanmar 0 960 Maldives 00 961 Lebanon 00 962 Jordan 00 963 Syria 0 00 964 Iraq 00 965 Kuwait 00 966 Saudi Arabia 0 00 967 Yemen 0 00 968 Oman 00 971 United Arab Emirates 0 00 972 Israel 0 00 973 Bahrain 0 974 Qatar 0 975 Bhutan 00 976 Mongolia 0 00 977 Nepal 00 98 Iran 00 994 Azerbaijan 8 810 995 Georgia 8 810 Notes: (1) In Jamaica, when direct dialing intercity or international calls from private telephones, it is necessary to first dial 113 and a 10-digit subscriber authorization code before dialing the intercity or international prefix. (2) When calling Sao Tome and Principe from other countries, it is necessary to prefix the subscriber number with the digits "12". (3) In France, the intercity dialing prefix will change to "0" and the international dialing prefix will change to "00" in October, 1996. The "0" intercity prefix must be used on all domestic calls including those within the same city, but the "0" is omitted when calling into France from other countries. (4) When calling from Ireland to Northern Ireland, the city code may be prefixed by "080" instead of "0044". (5) Some cities on the island of Cyprus are reached by dialing the country code for Turkey (90) instead of 357. (6) In Finland, the intercity dialing prefix will change to "0" and the international dialing prefix will change to "00" effective 12 October 1996. (7) When calling from San Marino to Italy, the city code and subscriber number must be prefixed by "0" instead of "0039". (8) When calling from Italy to San Marino, the subscriber number must be prefixed by "0549" instead of "00378". (9) In Norway, the international dialing prefix will change to "00" effective 31 January 1996. (10) In Mexico, calls to cellular subscribers use the prefix "94" instead of "91". (11) When calling from Mexico to countries in World Plan Area 1, the area code and subscriber number must be prefixed by "95" instead of "981". (12) In Colombia, the intercity dialing prefix will change to "0" and the international dialing prefix will change to "00" in September, 1996. (13) When calling from Malaysia to Singapore, the subscriber number must be prefixed by "02" instead of "00765". (14) When calling from Singapore to Malaysia, the city code and subscriber number must be prefixed by "0" instead of "00560". (15) When calling from one Inmarsat terminal to another, the "00" prefix is followed by the "country code" (871 through 874) and the terminal subscriber number, followed by "#". (16) Calls from Inmarsat terminals to other (non-Inmarsat) country codes must be made through an operator by dialing "00#". ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 16:50 CST From: madnix.uucp!zaphod@nicmad.nicolet.com (Ron Bean) Subject: Cellphones Cause Accidents? My employer periodically hands out a magazine that consists mainly of useless factoids. Sometimes I scan it briefly before I throw it away. This item recently caught my eye: "Your risk of being in an automobile accident increases 34% if you have a cellular phone in your car." Source: Rochester Institute of Technology. That's a pretty amazing statistic, if it's true. Do insurance companies charge extra if you have a cellphone? madnix!zaphod@nicmad.nicolet.com (Ron Bean) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:23:52 -0500 From: theseus@dgs.dgsys.com (Paul L. Moses) Subject: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? I was talking on the phone with my mom tonight and she read a piece of mail to me. Mom lives in Pittsburgh (412), and this flyer from AT&T was encouraging her to use 10ATT + 412 XXX YYYY for all the *toll* calls she is going to make in the Pittsburgh area. Now this seems a bit strange because 1) it's kind of complicated to have to use 10xxx + AC to dial what is basically a local call and 2) Pittsburgh has a pretty wide local calling area, so local toll calls are unusual. Is this AT&T first step into the local market? Btw Mom sends her regards to all. Paul ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:32:31 -0500 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Raymond Hazel (razel@unet.net.com) wrote: > I found that USWest has installed a "caller pays" service ... > the number was set up for seven digit (local) if the subscriber > paid air time, and 1 + seven digit if the caller paid. Presumably, the caller-pays dialing plan has now changed to 1-NPA-7D? Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 21:28 MET From: naddy@mips.pfalz.de (Christian Weisgerber) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Steve Cogorno writes: > I'd be pretty annoyed too. If someone wants me to call them on > *their* cellular phone for *their* conveinence, then *they* should pay > the airtime charges. Well, the polite way to do it is this: you advertise / give your friends your regular office / home number. When you're out and want to be reachable through your cell phone, you use call forwarding to transfer calls from your regular line to your cell phone. Thus, the caller pays the same as always, and you pay for the "luxury" of receiving the call on your cell phone. Of course one can recognize cellular numbers by thier prefix around here. (In Germany, that is.) Whether you use the above forwarding scheme for your office line or have potential customers call you directly on the more expensive cellular number depends on your competitive situation and line of business, I guess. I noticed that many of the numbers in the (somewhat euphemistically so-called) "contacts/modelling" ad section in our newspaper are cellular ones. Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber naddy@mips.pfalz.de See another pointless homepage at http://www.rhein-neckar.de/~mips/. -- currently reading: Robert L. Forward, Indistinguishable From Magic -- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #480 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 14 20:27:52 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id UAA16694; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:27:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:27:52 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511150127.UAA16694@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #481 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Nov 95 20:28:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 481 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Canada and the Caribbean (Mark Cuccia) Personal 800 Horror Story: PNG Telecommunications (Linc Madison) 11 Months to the Numbering Change in Finland (Kimmo Ketolainen) European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Jeroen Doucet) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Canada and the Caribbean Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 12:13:00 CST Recently, there were some postings about Canada and the Caribbean (at least those points in +1-809) being charged a higher rate from the US than calls to domestic points but longer in distance. There were some questions as to why they are integrated within the North American Country Code of +1 instead of not having a different Country Code. For PBX and other business telecommunication equipment (as well as COCOTS and motel/hotel systems), all points in Canada are contained in uniquely Canadian Areacodes and could be flagged as such. As for the Caribbean, for those points in +1-809, only Puerto Rico and the *US* Virgin Islands are billed at domestic type mileage rates, while 'non-US' Caribbean points are billed at actual *Interantional/Overseas* rates. Some programmable toll-restriction systems might have trouble going down to the Central Office Code NXX level to 'block-out' the 'non-US' points, but it is quite possible that each island/island- group of the Caribbean might be getting their *own* NPA codes in the near future. Bermuda is the first with 441, which is presently under 'permissive' dialing. One other reason for each Caribbean island/country/ etc. to get their own areacode within +1 is that calls to those points >from *other* parts of the world have had problems analyzing digits all the way down to the Central Office Code level for billing and identification purposes. Many countries can analyze down to six digits, but this includes the *Country* code of `1'. Therefore while there may be many different island countries in +1-809-46X, the originating equipment could only analyze down to +1-809-46, due to the maximum of six-digit screening. If each Caribbean country/island group had their own unique NPA code, calls to them from other parts of the world could be properly identified as such for billing purposes. Also, there was mention about the cultural and political associations between the US and Canada as well as between the US and the Caribbean, and also the ownership of telcos there by US telcos. Bell Canada still had a close association with AT&T (The Bell System) up until the early 1970's. I think that AT&T still owned 2% of Bell Canada at that time. Even when the Bell System went to the present day logo, Bell Canada was *still* using the older Bell logo -- the more realistic looking 'bell', but instead of `Bell System' being printed inside of the bell, the words `Bell Canada' were. Also, Bell Canada operated telephone service in the western provinces (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta) in the earlier years of this century, until the provincial governments took over telephone service. Bell Canada, at least the holding company BCE, still owns some of the telephone companies or _at least_ the present day *holding* companies for the eastern provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia's Maritime Telephone & Telegraph and its Island Telephone Company of Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland including Labrador). GTE has had holdings in BC Tel, which is the local & toll carrier for *most* of British Columbia. (The town of Prince Rupert City BC has its own local independent telephone company, while the northern extreme of BC has service from Northwestel). GTE also has holdings in Quebec Telephone, which provides local & toll services for *most* of southeastern PQ. If I'm not mistaken, Quebec Telephone was formed from several smaller local independent telcos in that region. There are *still* many other independents (usually small local municipally owned ones) scattered all over PQ and ON, including parts of southeastern PQ. As far the Caribbean: The two traditional carriers which domintated the Caribbean as a whole were ITT and Cable & Wireless. C&W serves the British (and formerly British) Caribbean, while ITT's `All America Cables & Radio' served the remainder. I don't know if AT&T used to own any large share of ITT, but I think that ITT (formerly IT&T) was deliberately named as such to make it appear that they were associated with AT&T. AT&T/Bell used to either own shares of, or at least license telcos in other countries (primarily in Latin America and Europe) during the earliest years of telephony, but much of that was turned over to ITT, as well as the individual governments' PTT departments in the 1920's. But ITT/AACR did provide the trunking to/from such Caribbean points as Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Is, the Dominican Republic, as well as presently non-NANP points as Cuba (+53), Haiti (+509), and the various French/Dutch (or formerly French/Dutch) points (+590, +596, +599, +297, and probably even +508). C&W and ITT/AACR have also been major telex carriers to/from these points as well as other parts of the world, in addition to RCA, WUI, etc. ITT/AACR had also been the major trunking carrier to/from most other Latin American countries (Central & South America- Country codes beginning with `5'), except for British (former British) locations such as Belize (+501), Guyana (+593), Falklands (+500) which were associated with C&W for major to/from trunking. About a year ago, my contact at Bellcore (who has since returned to the BOC he came from), told me that the Caribbean was assigned NPA 809 in 1958. There were no CCITT (ITU) Country Codes assigned or planned at that time, however he was under the impression from old AT&T material that NPA 809 was originally intended to cover the *entire* Caribbean. However, I've always been under the impression that the French/Dutch points were not originally intended to be part of the NANP since they use numbering schemes similar to their parent country, and I think that they are (were) part of their parent country's PTTs. Cuba was on good relations with the US until about 1959/60, and that terminated any possiblities that they would have been part of +1-809. Haiti also seems to have used a French approach to numbering, even tho' they share the island of Hispanola with the Dominican Republic; and Haiti has also had its rocky history. When I refer to a French/Dutch approach to numbering, I'm referring to the length of local numbers, as well as the scheme used for access codes for toll, international, directory, operator, repair, etc. altho' that may be changing these days. Also, there are some provisions for points not in, but near other NANP points to be able to request admission into the NANP. This may happen in the next few years for US islands in the Pacific (Guam, Saipan, Marshall Is, American Samoa, Marianna Is, etc.). However, there would have to be negotiations among the carriers and regulatory bodies of various NANP countries and the requesting non-NANP locations before admitting a new country into the NANP. (BTW, GTE and RCA were quite involved in telecommunications trunking throughout the Pacific area. GTE still owns the Hawaiin Telephone Company and RCA used to operate many Pacific area telex networks.) *Within* the various Caribbean points, American ownership of telcos is/was also noticeable: Codetel in the Dominican Republic is *still* associated with GTE. A brief history of Codetel since 1930/31 (in Spanish) is available by clicking away on their homepage at http://www.codetel.net.do ... Codetel has provided local service as well as the 'DDD' toll service for the Dominican Republic. ITT had a portion of the Virign Islands Telephone Company in the *US* Virgin Is, as well as the Puerto Rico Telephone Company. As for Puerto Rico, the 'DDD' Toll carrier for the island (as well as the Telex company) was known as the Puerto Rico Communications Authority. PRCA also provided local service in the more populated exchanges, while ITT's PR-Telco provided service elsewhere. I think that ITT sold its share of PR-Telco to PRCA a few years back, and PRCA consolidated the operations. As for the British (or formerly British) points in +1-809, Cable & Wireless has also been quite involved in the local service within each island point, along with the island's government telcos, however today many of these PTT-like operations have been privatized. But another American telco was also very much involved in some of these (formerly) British points- The Continental Telephone Company (CONTEL), back in the 1960's, 70's and early 80's. I don't think that they are involved down there anymore, but Contel owned/operated portions of the Jamaica Telephone Company, the Barbados Telephone Company, the Trinidad & Tobago Telephone Company and the Grenada Telephone Company. In the Bahamas, C&W and the Bahamas government (BaTelCo) provided local and 'DDD' service, however the island of Grand Bahama (includes the towns of Freeport & Lucaya) were served by *Contel's* Grand Bahama Telephone Company. I think that Contel sold its Bahamas operations a few years back, to BaTelCo. But when Contel had these holdings in the Caribbean, many of its locations used 'standard' NANP 3-digit service codes for Information (411), Repair (611), etc. while most other +1-809 parts of the Caribbean used other numbering schemes for service codes. I don't know if this has changed yet- many of these points *could* now be using current NANP dialing standards. BTW, Cable & Wireless has a *number* of webpages/homepages (under *several* URL's) and all are hypertext-linked togather. They describe current C&W products/services/etc for locations in North America & the Caribbean, as well as other parts of the world where C&W has been involved. They do have some good descriptions of the *history* of C&W involvement in telecommunications both in N.America as well as other (former) British territories all over. Calls between Mexico and the US/Canada have been handled on a 'direct' basis rather than going through an International Carrier. While the US/Canada now uses 011/01+52+ for dialing to *all* of Mexico rather than those special 'patch' arecodes which only reached *parts* of Mexico, signaling and switching/routing to Mexico has used North American standards rather than international/overseas protocols. Mexico itself uses special toll access codes to reach the US/Canada, different from their own internal toll access codes, *and* different from their international exit codes. Rates to Mexico from the US/Canada differ from rates to probably *anywhere* else in the world- and they have been probably some of the most *expensive* rates known. It *is* measured on both distance in the US/Canada as well as distance in Mexico, but the rate timeperiods as well as operator surcharges for collect/person/card have been some of the most unique when compared with rates/timeperiods/surcharges to other locations. I wonder if the Philippines had ever become a state in the US rather than becomming a country in 1948 if it would have become a part of the NANP. Another example of US communications companies having been involved in the Caribbean and the Pacific involves radio & TV broadcasting. I've seen old (circa 1950's, 60's, 70's) lists of affiliate stations (in back issues of such as 'Broadcasting Yearbook', etc) of the major US radio & TV networks (CBS, NBC, ABC, Mutual) which include affiliates located in Bermuda, the Bahamas, even the Philippines, etc. in addition to Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Is, and US islands in the Pacific. There were even Cuban radio/TV stations identified as US network affiliates in the lists from the 1950's. Since Canada has its own developed radio & TV networks (CBC, CTV, etc), there were few if any Canadian stations identified individually as US network affiliates. Most new US programming has been distributed to Canada via a contract with the CBC or CTV rather than first-run syndication to individual Canadian stations, nor Canadian stations being directly affiliated with US networks. Most *overseas* distribution of US programming has been handled through separate international distribution- either separate companies, or a separate international subsidiary of a US network. But as for those Caribbean and Pacific stations, I don't know if they carried any 'live feeds' from the US networks, or if they were shipped tapes & films from the networks themselves- and if commercials for US companies were included or not. So, there had been cultural, political, *business*, and technical considerations which made Canada and most of the Caribbean parts of the NANP. I only wish that *all* rates within the NANP were more 'standardized', but remember that a toll call withIN a state usually has cost *more* than an interstate call of greater distance. Similarly, a call from Florida to the Bahamas costs *more* than a call from Florida to Alaska or Hawaii. Even a call from Washington state to Puerto Rico probably costs less than a call to British Columbia. Some of this (ownership, toll-rates, etc) may change even further over the next several years, as it has been changing already. These days, competition in both Canada *and even in the Caribbean* continues to grow. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:01:43 -0800 From: LincMad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Personal 800 Horror Story: PNG Telecommunications Executive summary: if you value your sanity, DO NOT sign up for 800 number service from PNG Telecommunications, American Travel Network, or Hospitality Services Group. They have displayed an astounding lack of competence in completing the simplest of tasks. I don't know what PNG is supposed to stand for, but I wonder if it's Persona Non Grata. Well, okay, earlier this year I stopped off to get some of my favorite authentic Texas-style Barbecue, and while I was standing around waiting I picked up a brochure from AMERICAN TRAVEL NETWORK, also d.b.a. HOSPITALITY SERVICES GROUP, extolling the virtues of their calling card (from LDDS, a deal I've been reasonably pleased with), and the wonders of a personal 800 number (provider not named, but it turns out to be an outfit called PNG Telecommunications in West Chester, Ohio). I sent in the application, got the LDDS calling card, which works just fine. Got a postcard a couple of weeks later notifying me that the terms of the 800 service had been changed, that there was now a $3.00/month minimum bill. If the new terms are not agreeable, please notify within ten days to cancel processing of your application. I figured I could live with a $3/month minimum, so I didn't call to cancel. A month or two went by with no further word, so I dug out the brochure and called to inquire. "Oh, we don't have any application from you in our files." Yes, you do. You sent me an acknowledgement. "Oh, well, we'll have to contact the company that does the 800 numbers, but it's after 5:00 there, so I'll have to fax them and call you back tomorrow." No word from them the next day, so I called the following day. "Oh, we don't have any application from you in our files." Yes, you do. You were supposed to call me back yesterday. A couple more phone calls, each with a promise from ATN/HSG that they would promptly attend to the matter and get back to me. No word was forthcoming. I more or less gave up and let the matter rest for a while. A few weeks later, I received a bill in the mail from PNG Telecommunications for my first month's service, $3.00 plus $0.11 tax. Of course, the bill did not anywhere mention WHAT THE 800 NUMBER IS. I called the number for billing corrections to get a credit for the $3.11, since I don't consider my service to begin until they give me the actual number. I also asked them to have someone call me and tell me what the number is. I also left FIVE messages on the voicemail for the customer service number making the same simple request. I even told them they could just call the 800 number to be sure they weren't giving it out to someone without the owner's permission. It was not until my sixth attempt that I actually reached a human being. You see, their system rolls over to voicemail if the call is not picked up within a very brief period of time, although, of course, their voice mailbox is often full. When I did finally reach a human being, she was able very quickly to locate my record and tell me what my 800 number is. I tried it, it works, everything is fine. For a brief while, at least. I used the number a couple of times, but didn't really give it out to very many people yet, since its main purpose is for me to be able to reach my answering machine when I'm on the road. Then, in October, I was in Albuquerque for the Balloon Fiesta, and decided to check my machine for messages. I got a recording that the number had changed or was no longer in service. I called customer service, but, of course, the voice mailbox was full, AND they took Columbus Day off. I finally got through to voicemail on Tuesday and left a message demanding that they reconnect my 800 number. I tried the 800 number again, and it rang! Oh, good, it's working.... but then some strange man answered the phone. He was definitely not my answering machine, nor was he anyone who had any business being in my apartment. I explained to him that I had dialed an 800 number that was supposed to ring to my home number. I asked him if he had an 800 number from PNG; no, he doesn't have an 800 number, period. I asked him if his number was anything close to 415-xxx-xxxx; no, not even close -- he's in area code 970, which is in Colorado. Another call to customer service voicemail, asking that they connect my 800 number TO MY NUMBER. I left them that number, and also left them my daytime phone number in case they had any questions. A couple of days later, I tried the 800 number. It returns a standard busy signal (not a fast busy) every time. I tried the POTS number; it rings right through to the answering machine. I called customer service voicemail and left yet another message. They left a message on my voicemail at work that the number seems to be working from their location in Ohio, so if I am still having trouble, I should tell them from what areas I am unable to dial the number. I called the friend I had stayed with in Albuquerque and asked him to dial the 800 number, and if it worked, to just leave a message on the answering machine. A couple of minutes later, my phone rang, and it was Rob calling from Albuquerque. He told me it seemed to work fine; we chatted briefly and hung up. Then it occurred to me: I hadn't asked him to call me at work to tell me what had happened. A quick call confirmed my suspicion: PNG had connected my 800 number to my *work* phone instead of my home phone. I had been getting a busy signal because my call was trying to loop back to the phone I was dialing out on! I called customer service voicemail _yet again_, and this time they got things sorted out. The happy times did not last very long, though. I tried my 800 number last week, and it rang through to a very pleasant-sounding woman, who told me that she is in South Dakota. Yet another call to customer service voicemail, demanding that they reconnect my number to the correct destination AND LEAVE IT ALONE. The following day, the 800 number was again ringing to my home number. That brings us to 5:25 this morning. My phone rings, but it's not the collection agency looking for the guy with exactly the same name, it's a man who seems slightly confused that I answered and asks for Pam. I tell him that he has a wrong number, and he rings off. A minute later, the phone rings again, same guy. He explains that he dialed an 800 number that is supposed to ring his home number in ... South Dakota! He was calling to wish his wife a happy birthday. I inquired, and he has an account with PNG Telecommunications, which assigned him the same 800 number I have, effective 9/19. (They had finally assigned it to me some time in July.) Well, that explains why my number was ringing in South Dakota, but it doesn't explain why it was giving a "number has been changed" recording and going to Colorado, both of which it was doing after 9/19. Anyway, to repeat, it has been my experience that PNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS of West Chester, Ohio, is massively incompetent in handling the simplest of tasks. They have repeatedly bungled my service and deserve to go directly into bankruptcy without further ado. To that end, I will be looking for other service providers. I hope that ATN/HSG (which acts as a reseller for LDDS and PNG) will also elect to do business with a better-run company, for the sake of their own reputation, if not for the sake of their customers. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com [TELEOCM Digest Editor's Note: Give up on them! Did you know that when I first signed up with Call America for their MyLine 800 service it took them exactly five minutes to take down all the required information and turn the number on. No problems have been encountered since. Of course it costs a bit more than three dollars per month. I think they now get ten dollars per month plus the cost of calls, but that includes 'call waiting' and 'three way calling' on your 800 number along with automatic switching between voice and fax on incoming calls, immediate changes in forwarding to where you want the number to ring (it is a user programmable option) and a 408/415 number instead of (in addition to) an 800 number if desired; mainly for people who get a lot of international calls where the international telco stumbles on 800. Seriously, I have yet to find a better 800 service although I also have an 800 number from Call Home America (I think they go through Allnet) which costs me only three dollars per month. For MyLine infor- mation contact betterly@callamer.com. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Kimmo.Ketolainen@utu.fi (Kimmo Ketolainen +358 40 555 5508) Subject: 11 Months to the Numbering Change in Finland Organization: Turun yliopisto =B7 University of Turku, Turku, Finland Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 15:11:09 GMT The largest single numbering change in Finland this far occurs on Saturday 12 Oct 1996 at 00.00 (22.00 UTC). The change affects most numbers in the country: * All current 74 area codes are rearranged to only 13 * Mobile phone and pager networks retain their codes * The trunk prefix 9 changes to 0 * 00 is introduced as a neutral international access code BACKGROUND The process of harmonizing the different access codes and emergency numbers with those of the Western Europe began in early 1990's. One of the major differencies has been the emergency number which has been throughout the years 000 (and 002, 005) in Finland, whereas in many other countries 00 has been used as the international line access code. To free up the 00 ... number space, the standard EU emergency number 112 was introduced in Finland in 1992, and a recording was later put behind 000 to tell callers to dial the proper number. During the last five years the number of different area codes has been coming down slowly with occasional merges. Currently, the number of them is 74, and it will remain the same until next October. The year 1994 brought finally competition to all the remaining monopoly fields of telecommunications. At the same time, the concept of 13 large billing areas was introduced, and area code billing was abolished making all calls within a telecommunications area billable at the local call rate. The 13 areas are approximately the same as the provinces of the country with a few small local exceptions, and a separate code of the capital area. Subscriber numbers have been changed gradually to make most of them seven digits long. The largest changes occur in 1995 and 1996, and the last numbers change in 11 Oct 1996, on the last day of the old area code system. On 12 Oct 1996 none of the old area codes is usable. NEW AREA CODES Area/Province New code Old codes ---------------------------------------------------------------- Aland Islands 018 928 Central Finland 014 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 Hame 03 916 917 918 919 931 932* 933 934 935 936 937 Kuopio 017 971 972 977 978 979 Kymi 05 951 952 953 954 Lapland 016 960 9692 9693 9694 9695 9696 9697 9698 Mikkeli 015 955 956 957 958 959 North Karelia 013 973 974 975 976 Oulu 08 981 982 983 984 985 986 988 989 Turku and Pori 02 921 922 923 924 925 926 930 932* 938 939 Uusimaa I 09** 90 Uusimaa II 019 911 912 914 915 Vaasa 06 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 *) Exception: the current area code 932 splits as follows: the municipality of Huittinen belongs to the new area code 02; the four other municipalities of Mouhijarvi, Suodenniemi, Vammala and Aetsa belong to the new area code 03. **) Capital area Example 1, national dialing: (921) 237 8227 changes to (02) 237 8227 Example 2, int'l dialing: +358 21 237 8227 changes to +358 2 237 8227 Example 3, national dialing: (90) 1234 5678 changes to (09) 1234 5678 Example 4, int'l dialing: +358 0 1234 5678 changes to +358 9 1234 5678 MOBILE PHONES AND PAGERS Mobile phone and pager networks retain their codes. Only the trunk prefix 9 changes to 0 which is dropped when dialing from abroad. Example 1, national dialing: 940 555 5508 changes to 040 555 5508 Example 2, int'l dialing: +358 40 555 5508 does not change INTERNATIONAL ACCESS CODES The new neutral international access code 00 is taken into use to accompany the various operator-specific codes such as 990, 994 and 999. SPECIAL SERVICES CODES The trunk prefix changes on all special service codes except 9600, 9700 and 9800. Kimmo Ketolainen Internet Telefonkartensammler Yo-kyla 84 A 10 WWW http://iki.fi/kk IAP http://www.sci.fi FIN-20540 Turku GSM +358 40 555 5508 Tel +358 21 237 8227 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 12:18:24 +0100 From: Doucet@SARA.NL (Jeroen Doucet) Subject: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (was Re: Bell Atlantic) franz@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Franz) wrote: > As far as I know, all European GSM networks are caller-pays. > The cellulars are usually on a separate area code so that it is obvious > that you are calling a special number. However, the "specialness" of the > area code is visible only from within the country that the GSM is > registered in. Well, you are right and you are wrong. Although the matter is quite complicated (especially when there are three different countries involoved) there is a situation when the receiver pays. If I am in Spain with my Dutch GSM phone (and I *do* have coverage :) and you call my Dutch mobile number, I pay the difference between the Dutch cellular tarif and the regular international tarif. But what happens if you call me from Italy on my Dutch GSM while I am in Greece? And if I am in France and use my Dutch GSM to call my French neighbour on his French GSM? Nobody knows. Regards, Jeroen Doucet Jeroen.Doucet@Sara.nl Office: (+31) (0)30-6665800 Facsimile: (+31) (0)30-6662893 Member of Instant - http://huizen.dds.nl/~instant ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #481 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 14 23:46:58 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA29413; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:46:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:46:58 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511150446.XAA29413@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #482 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Nov 95 23:47:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 482 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Wireless Solutions for Roaming a Facility (Robohn Scott) Re: Some BellSouth Notes (Mark Cuccia) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Bill Sohl) Re: A Unique Pan-European Country Code? (Sergio Gelato) Re: A Unique Pan-European Country Code? (Jean B. Sarrazin) Belgian Phonebooks Now Online! (Alex van Es) Question About Local Rates (Scott Anderson) My Rights Against US West? (Pete Kruckenberg) Free Text on Resampling Statistics (Peter Bruce) Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? (Wes Leatherock) Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? (Andrew C. Green) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robohn Scott Subject: Wireless Solutions for Roaming a Facility Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 08:13:00 PST We're looking for a solution to the following situation: tech support staff roam about an office and need easy access to their incoming phone calls. They can forward their calls, but this gets bothersome and tedious after you have to reset forwarding the second, third, fourth time that hour. Cellular reception is very poor in some areas of the building, so that doesn't look like an option. One option could be a 900 MHz cordless phone with multiple base stations and a single handset; does anyone sell these? Web pages for Panasonic and Sony are no help on this option, but I'll try some others. I've also heard about special internal wiring in situations like this, but this sounds like a pretty expensive solution. Any ideas on specific products and/or services? We'll entertain all options. The basic requirement is for a person within the office to have continuous access to a single incoming phone line as they roam about the office. A lightweight, small handset would be nice; a headset option would be even nicer. Approximate cost information would also be appreciated. Thanks, Scott Robohn....robohns@bah.com (until 11/9/95; robohns@ncr.disa.mil starting 11/13/95) James Dirksen...dirksenj@ncr.disa.mil ------------------------------ From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Re: Some BellSouth Notes Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 14:37:00 CST In TD 15:476, Stan Schwartz stated several experiences with CID Deluxe (Name and Number) in Charlotte NC, BellSouth (formerly Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.) territory. I've had similar situations here in New Orleans, also BellSouth (formerly South Central Bell). I too received a call from Nassau County NY (516) during the day on Friday. I saw it on my ID box when I got home. Other calls had come in since that one, so I couldn't *69 to see if I would get a quote on the ten-digit number. I assume that I would, as I've *69'd other occasional inter-LATA calls on my ID box, and did get a quote back, altho' I couldn't get a direct connect back. The call yesterday showed up in Uppercase as NASSAUZN08, NY. I've heard that many inter-LATA calls won't always show the customer name, but rather the city (ratecenter) and state. I even had a *local* call show up as (and I'm not misplacing punctuation here): NEWORLEANS ,LA Yes, the comma was a space AFTER New Orleans and just before the state. This showed up that way for about a week, but it was a new service. It was a friend who'd recently separated from his wife and was living in an apartment and had gotten additional service there in his own name. After about a week his name began to show up with the number. I also have another friend who is a merchant seaman. He ships out to sea for one to six months at a time, and usually has his telephone service changed to 'vacation' service or 'inactive' service. While his service is 'inactive' or 'vacation', I've gotten 'Number that has been disconnected or is no longer in service' recordings direct from his switch, but other times I've gotten routed to centralized intercept with 'Number you are calling- NNX, XXXX- has been temporarily disconnected' and other similar type recordings from central intercept. When he returns from sea and re-establishes service always with the *same* telephone number, I have at times gotten dashes along the entire name portion of the CID box for about a week when he calls me, however the last time he shipped out and had his service 'put-on-hold', I got a full name with number when he returned and reconnected. As for 'PAY PHONE' in the name portion, I too don't know anyone known as 'Mr./Ms./Miss/Mrs. Pay' nor 'Mr./Ms./Miss/Mres. Phone', but I *do* like to know that a call is comming *from* a payphone! I usually answer those calls (and 'Anonymous Call' or 'Private Call' in a deadpan voice if I choose to answer at all! As for 'Anonymous' v. 'Private', they are both *67 calls. It is the manufacturer of the box which determines what word will display! My older number-only ID box stated that 'Private Call' could show, yet the newer name & number box states that 'Annonymous Call' could show. Both boxes were from Radio Shack, and even tho' we didn't have neither per-call or per-line blocking in the 'usual' sense, I did get some 'Private Call' displays on my number-only box when I had number-only service. These calls came from someone I knew who worked at a government site locally, on an ISDN or PBX system. As for the call from Nassau County, NY, I called up 516-555-1212 when I saw it when I got home last night. I *assume* I was speaking with NYNEX or AT&T directory listings operators and not some boiler room private DA. She tried to look up the number for me, but had *no further info*. I used to get that when calling up local 1-411 when I hadn't upgraded to the Name with CID. PBX outgoing trunks, private non-pubs, payphones, etc. aren't usually in the 411's databases. Payphones *could* be in there *if* the actual telephone number of the business is the payphone there! And calls from those situations have shown up at different times as both 'PAY PHONE' and also the name of the business. I spoke with the 516 DA operator for a few minutes and explained that I was from New Orleans and I had that number and the Nassau Zone 8 NY on my ID box. She told me that she'd gotten a call from someone in *Charlotte NC* just the other night with a similar question about a 516 number and the name Nassau Zone (whatever) NY on their caller-ID box. As for WilTel, I've had friends nearby in the Baton Route & Lafayette LA Latas as well as the Gulfport & Jackson MS Latas call me recently with WilTel's code 10-555+ (101-0555+) and all I've gotten was "Out-of-Area". I remember reading in TD a couple of months ago that WilTel wasn't transmitting CID between places that they *used* to. Of course, we might be seeing CID between *most* LATAs and via *most* carriers starting next month. And when WilTel *did* work for some calls, I got NAME with the number- the name of the customer, not the city! One more thing -- since MCI has 'passcoded' 800-MY-ANI-IS, there has been more mention of 10-732 plus `1' plus an Atlanta (404 NPA) number. I've been told by others that it is never charged on your bill. I always prefered the idea of an 800 number for ANI readback, since many PBX's and private payphones and the like (including cellular) might block 10-XXX (101-XXXX) codes while not necessarily blocking 800. My cellphone does NOT allow me to use ANY 10-XXX override codes at this time. Some private payphones allow only certain 10-XXX codes to be used, and the others get a synthesized 'invalid' recording *from the COCOT*, not Bell's line/office. Even for the 10-XXX codes that COCOTS allow, they wouldn't let a `1+' go thru and only let `0+' instead. Even Bell's payphones don't allow 10-XXX-1+ route to other carriers since not many other carriers provide true Coin service. They only exception I've run across (other than reading about the PA/NJ & NJ/NY corridors) is 10-288-1+ InTRA-LATA. I haven't tried 10-732+1+404... from a Bell payphone yet to see what happens, tho. BUT I tried it from my Cellular phone (both 10-732-1+404... AND 10-732+404... without the 1+. I forgot to try 10-732+0+404...) Instead of getting BellSouth Mobility's 504+seven-digit trunk number (which I did get on 800-MY-ANI-IS), I got a ten-digit quoteback of MY OWN Cellular's number!!! I wonder if the PBX here allowed me to access that number- if I'd get an outgoing trunk of the PBX or if I'd get the actual dial-in 'extension' number. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: billsohl@earth.planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Date: 11 Nov 1995 22:42:40 GMT Organization: Planet Access Networks - Stanhope, NJ Josh Rubin (jrubin@inforamp.net) wrote: > My query has probably already been covered in an FAQ somewhere, but > just in case, I'm wondering how a Telco could guarantee that any > particular call on an ISDN line would be digital. It strikes me that > unless you're in a closed system such as a university or corporation, > that they really couldn't gurantee it. The reason is that a number of > places still don't have fully digital networks. If you make a voice call (voice bearer capability) then the call may transit a non-digital transmission path. > If I am trying to call a BBS in an area code that has an all digital > network from another similarly-equipped region, what guarantee do I > have that the call doesn't have to go through some analog switches on > its way to the other area code, thus slowing data down immensely (i.e. > getting regular service at premium ISDN rates)? If you make a data (data bearer capability) then the call will not be completed unless there is an end-to-end digital connection available. The data call can complete to either another ISDN line or to a switched 56 line/network. Cheers, Bill Sohl K2UNK (Budd lake, New Jersey) (billsohl@planet.net) ------------------------------ From: gelato@oort.ap.sissa.it (Sergio Gelato) Subject: Re: A Unique Pan-European Country Code? Date: 14 Nov 1995 21:32:11 GMT Organization: SISSA, Trieste In article , Mark Cuccia wrote: > According to Oftel, the Office of Telecommunications in the UK, which > is the regulatory and numbering administrative governmental body, in > Numbering Bulletin 17 (Oct.1995), > Europe is to request that the ITU make Country Code 388 available for > Pan-European services. Please define "Europe". Does this mean the Commission of European Communities? The CSCE? Some other body? Which countries would be covered by such a proposal, and who would be administering the number space within "country" code 388? > Should this not occur, then the European telephone standards > organizations are considering a national numbering approach for > Pan-European services, using the unused 00 capacity behind existing > Country Codes. ie: 44-00 for Pan-European services located in the UK, > 33-00 for those located in France, etc. These Pan-European services > would be billed at a Pan-European premium rate. Bad thinking. That would make it difficult for a "pan-european" (I hate that word) service to be provided from multiple locations, with routing based on location and time of the day. Additionally, as Mark Cuccia points out, how do you dial providers in your own country? + is already used for "Country Direct" operator services in some places. I also dislike the +388 proposal, since it could create a precedent for many other groups of countries to request additional country codes to be used in this way. The worldwide +800 code is more acceptable since it is unique by definition. Far better than either approach, in my view, would be to reserve a prefix in each country for supranational services (it would not have to be the same in all countries at first, although it would be nice to agree on a preferred prefix) and assign numbers behind that prefix on a continent-wide basis. > I wonder if Pan-European services could also include a Freephone > (Toll-Free) service or a 'local-call' or 'national call' rate > services. What is "national call"? In most places there isn't a single rate for all long-distance calls within the same country. Even if there were one now, the impending breakup of the long-distance monopolies would change that. (Are Mercury and BT charging the same rates for calls?) The proposal mentions a "Pan-European premium rate"; I assume there would actually be a set of different rates to choose from, some such that calls will earn money to the service provider and others that will cost it money (by being free or discounted to the caller). Let's just hope that the rate can easily be determined by inspection of the phone number ... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:30:58 MET From: Jean B. Sarrazin Subject: Re: A Unique Pan-European Country Code? International toll free is already available in Europe for calls terminating in the Netherlands. The customer in the foreign country dials his international exit code (00, normally) + 31-800 * the assigned tool free number. Part of the recent Dutch renumbering plan was to allow more space in the 8XX range for such services. As for a global country code for Europe, I can't start to imagine the implications! To avoid re-shuffling all the number assignments in the various countries, we would probably end up with a "country code within a country code". Jean B Sarrazin jean@xs4all.nl Amsterdam, The Netherlands ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 11:47:53 GMT From: alex@worldaccess.nl (Alex van Es) Subject: Belgian Phonebooks Now Online! Hi Al, To be honest, I don't know if this is any news to you people out-there, but I read that the Belgian phonebooks can now be accessed via http://www.infobel.be. You can search on name and address. Alex Alex@Worldaccess.NL, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands Phone:+31-55-421184 Pager:+31-6-59333551 (CT-2 Greenpoint) Voicemail: +31-6-59958458 ------------------------------ From: Scott Anderson Subject: Question About Local Rates Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 22:29:59 -0600 Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. In MN, USWest charges a Federal Access Charge of $3.50 and $1.20 for Touch Tone Service. I am interested to find out if this is the norm and/or what are the rates in other states or other local phone companies in MN. I have heard that you do not have to pay the Federal Access Charge and am wondering if that is true. Send me an email at: sandr@skypoint.com or post to this newsgroup if you can answer some of my questions. Thanks, Scott Anderson ------------------------------ From: pete@inquo.net (Pete Kruckenberg) Subject: My Rights Against US West? Date: 15 Nov 1995 00:59:36 GMT Organization: inQuo Internet (801) 530-7160 I have a couple of frustrating situations, and wanted to find out what recourse I have against US West to make them move faster. I'd also like to know what others do in situations like these to make US West do their thing. These are all frame-relay related: - small city, facilities are available from the location to the CO, but there is no bandwidth between the FR switch at the CO to the next FR "hub". They supposedly have "several" other orders on hold waiting for another T1 to be installed to the next switch (originally scheduled for Dec. 18, but my complaining has "expedited" the order, so it "may" be sooner than that). I found this out *five weeks* after placing the order for a 56k FR line, after two weeks of serious prodding and screaming; - larger city (within 15 miles of their newest, best-connect CO in Utah) Order for 56k line, after three weeks a tech informs customer that there are no facilities and it'll be another 1-30 days. I don't know more (put in my *3rd* call in as many days to get more information on this situation); - larger city, customer already has 56k FR line, but wants to put in another T1 line. Customer is ISP, so had to pay $4k to run a 100-pair entry line. After *7 WEEKS* of waiting, US West tells customer that there are only 50 pairs to the pole where his 100-pair line ends, and they're all used up. Customer also has five POTS lines waiting because of this problem. Customer went to PSC and SBA (after talking to his Small Business Group rep's supervisor) two weeks ago, still no action. US West says first available install would be Dec. 1. - two weeks ago, we order a facilities check for the building we're in still haven't heard anything, in spite of mentioning it three to five times/wk to our rep (that was along with the other problems.) Now, what I need to know is what rights I have (if any) to expect: (1) US West informs me within a reasonable amount of time if there will be a facilities problem (a week would be reasonable); (2) Frame-relay services installed within a specific amount of time, even if there are facilities problems, or US West comes up with another solution for me (not charging more than frame-relay services would cost); (3) Facilities checks within a reasonable amount of time (a week would be reasonable); (4) If I pay to have 100 pairs run to my building, I get some kind of guarantee that I can actually use those 100 pairs within a reasonable amount of time (again, a week would be reasonable); If I do have such rights, how can I enforce them? It seems that since I can't tell US West "fine, I'll go buy from XYZ competitor", I should have equivelant leverage some other way. Do I? If I have a complaint about US West's services, whether rights are involved or not, what's the best way to take care of it? What I've done so far is to call the Executive Office in Denver and Utah, but so far, not even *they* call back to let me know what's up. At this point, I'm thinking I'm going to just start filing formal/informal complaints with the local PSC every time US West has a delay doing *anything*, because it takes less time to deal with the PSC than US West, and hopefully I'll get better results through the PSC. The most frustrating thing is that it seems that the more you pay US West, the less they care about you and the less service you get. If I were running a business and I knew that *every one* of my higher-paying customers *hated* my company, I would do something about it. Seems to not be the case with US West, in spite of the fact that telecom is being deregulated in Utah. Anyways, any suggestions or ideas would be greatly appreciated. Pete Kruckenberg pete@inquo.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What happens with many/most complaints to utility commissions -- or for that matter the FCC -- is that the PUC's rarely make any pretense of knowing anything about the subject matter at hand. They just take your complaint and put it on the telex or fax machine and send it to their contact at telco for a response. This will probably get you an answer back from telco faster than by contacting telco directly, but there still is no guarantee it will be the sort of answer you want to hear. It has been said that telcos have a sort of pecking order they use to respond to complaints. See where you stand on the list: First come the commission complaints. When that telex machine on the dedicated tie-line to the commission starts chattering, they go over and look at it and respond to that. Now days, perhaps it is a fax machine on a tie-line to the commission. None the less, when the PUC hears from a complaining customer, typically it just goes on the telex/fax to the service rep(s) at telco designated to deal with those. You are not unique, maybe a hundred people daily call or write the PUC in their state seeking assistance. Telco responds to the PUC and the PUC responds to the customer. For years -- maybe still -- telco kept a file of 'complainers'; i.e. the people who would not accept whatever answer telco gave them until the PUC intervened. Telco reps stay busy answering commission complaints all day long. The customer goes away pleased knowing that 'when you turn the screws on telco, and get the government involved, telco will respond.' Oh yeah? Second come management complaints. These are people that have called the chairman of the board at telco or the president. Typically, what he knows about telephony could be stated in a few sentences or less. So the 'assistant to the chairman' -- actually a highly placed flunky at telco -- takes the call, tries to sooth the customer's ruffled feathers, fills out a form describing the complaint, and sends it downstairs to the service reps for handling, the same way the commission does on their dedicated fax/telex line. The service reps resolve the problem (or not) and pass the message back upstairs to the highly placed flunky who has limited authority to respond in the name of the chairman/president to let the customer know that the chairman apologizes for the problem and thanks the customer for bringing it to his attention. Customer gets a 'personal response from the chairman' and is pleased knowing that 'when you turn the screws on those people and report them to their supervisors you can get action.' Oh yeah? Third, a now mostly obsolete form of communication with telco, that of writing them a letter or visiting the business office in person. Are there any public offices any longer? There are *none* here in the Chicago area any longer. If you go to where the public office used to be located in the headquarters building downtown, you will see a couple rows of phones with little privacy walls around them where, if you take the phone off the hook it rings direct to the reps at some undisclosed location. Rumor has it they are in the telephone building at 77th and Constance Avenue but I have never been able to verify that. Rumor has it the reps were moved away for safekeeping after too many disgruntled customers began showing up and acting out their agressions due to their phone being shut off for non-payment or their repair service/installation request being ignored/mishandled for the umpteenth time. Finally come the telephone callers like yourself. As time permits each day, the reps handle those calls and complaints. You say it sounds like they don't have much time left after responding to the commission, the flunky assigned the duty of apologizing for the chair- man of the board, and the walk in customers who 'go postal' on them? You may be right. You are correct that you will get a faster response via the commission; you will not necessarily get any more accurate a response than had you asked directly as you are doing now, since the commission only knows what telco tells them just as the chairman of the board only knows what the people downstairs tell him via his flunky. The real solution? You don't spell it c-o-m-m-i-s-s-i-o-n, you spell it c-o-m-p-e-t-i-t-i-o-n. Not 'competition' where the 'competitors' lease cable and central office facilities from the local telco, but competition where they have nothing whatsoever to do with the local telco except interconnect with them for the exchange of traffic. Their own central offices, their own cable and wire, their own business procedures and *held to the same legal requirements and commission rules as the existing locals.* Then you will see some radical changes in how things happen. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 95 05:16 CST Subject: Free Text on Resampling Statistics From: m11305@qcnet.com Resampling methods (including the bootstrap and other simulation procedures) have revolutionized the field of statistics in the 1980's and 1990's. To help spread the word about resampling, the Resampling Project offers you free a copy of the only introductory text on resampling. Just reply "yes" to this message. We'll send instructions on how to download it from the internet. Please include your regular address ("snail mail") -- we'll send you a printed article about resampling from Science News and other printed material. Alternatively, U.S. residents can get it on disk (send us your formatted high density IBM disk plus return label in a disk mailer) or in hard copy (send us $6 to cover shipping/printing). In return, would you please state in a sentence or two how you use statistics. * With resampling procedures you use the given sample data to repeatedly simulate hypothetical "re-samples", recalculating the statistic of interest. Peter Bruce Resampling Stats phone 703-522-2713 612 N. Jackson St. fax 703-522-5846 Arlington, VA 22201 m11105@qcnet.com USA ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:59:00 GMT Subject: Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) wrote: > The current movie "Devil in a Blue Dress" is set in Los Angeles in > 1948. The protagonist and apparently all of his neighbors are black: > I mention this because it helps define what part of the city they > live in. > He has a dial phone. Is this realistic? When did Los Angeles get > dial phones? Most of Los Angeles had dial phones before World War II. In fact much of Los Angeles had operator toll dialing to the distant phone (in the metro area) by then. Pacific Telephone (and probably the independents, too; there were a lot of them in the greater Los Angeles area) had step-by-step equipment, so originally the operators had to dial variable numbers of digits to route to distant locations, depending on the routing. As they thought of adding subscriber toll dialing, they had to develop their own version, since Bell Labs (and Western Electric) were not supporting anything of the sort for step offices. After all, those were only in small and unimportant places, and large cities and metropolitan areas were what the Labs cared about. In 1948 almost all of the Los Angeles metropolitan area was dial, probably no "almost" to it. After all, Oklahoma City, where I live, has been all dial since 1928. Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@baremetl.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:16:01 -0600 From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? jsinger@scn.org (Joseph Singer) writes: > I don't know why it wouldn't be the "norm" to have dial telephones in > Los Angeles in 1948. Dial phone central offices were installed from the > early 20s on the east coast. Gee, I was waiting for Telecom history expert Mark Cucchia to jump all over this one. Perhaps he's off sick... :-) Perhaps we can take Jack Benny's radio shows from that time period as a guide. He was forever calling the switchboard operators (Gertrude Gearshift and Mabel Flapsaddle) in an effort to get a call through to somewhere, usually unsuccessfully, while we listen to Gertrude and Mabel discussing various things between themselves. The fact that he couldn't dial the call directly seems to be a given with the audience. Occasionally someone on the show will dial a telephone, but those two operators were minor recurring characters for years. Andrew C. Green (312) 266-4431 Adobe Systems, Inc. (formerly Frame Technology) Advanced Product Services 441 W. Huron Internet: acg@frame.com Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #482 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 15 10:11:47 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA23794; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:11:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:11:47 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511151511.KAA23794@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #483 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Nov 95 10:11:30 EST Volume 15 : Issue 483 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Floyd Davidson) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Matt Woodling) Re: Personal 800 Horror Story: PNG Telecommunications (Stu Jeffery) Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? (Henry Baker) Re: Old Western Electric CPE (Mike Curtis) Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming (Ralph Becker) Re: Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? (Linc Madison) Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? (Raymond Hazel) Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? (Robert Bulmash) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: floyd@bravo.imagi.net (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Date: 15 Nov 1995 05:26:40 GMT Reply-To: floyd@bravo.imagi.net In article , Philip Treuer wrote: > I believe the answer to the question you've posed is "no" (Can a telco > guarantee whether any particular call on an ISDN line will be digital?) The IXC can guarantee that an ISDN data call will in fact be digital, and indeed if it is not the call cannot be completed. A voice call might not (and need not) be all digital. > In my state, Alaska, the two major interexchange carriers, AT&T Alascom Before proceeding, let me point out that I am an AT&T Alascom employee. I am not paid to speak for the company, and I don't. It should also be understood that AT&T purchased Alascom from Pacific Telecom Inc. only this fall. The historical faults of Alascom do not reflect on AT&T, but on Pacific Corp, the owner of PTI. > and GCI, have indicated that they won't even carry a switched 56 or 64K ISDN > call unless they can charge extra for the call -- which will require data > users to dial special access numbers on interexchange calls. The only > exception to this so far is that switched 56 calls to the lower 48 from > Anchorage (the only community so far that has switched 56 service; ISDN is > not available any where in the state) are transported intact and at no extra > charge. AT&T Alascom (and I believe GCI also) has offered ISDN and SW56 service for a number of years to all major locations in the state. I know of no requirement for special dialing. The difficulty is that neither IXC can offer service to a customer without a leased line interconnect through a local LEC, which is relatively expensive. I'm not sure if ATU in Anchorage is now offering ISDN or SW56, but the last that I knew not one single LEC in the state offered either, and such service could only be purchased through the IXC's at the mentioned rather expensive rates. The State of Alaska and the federal government (through FTS-2000) both use SW56 and ISDN to some degree. I really can't comment in any depth on how much difficulty GCI might be enountering with ISDN calls switch through their network. Compression, for example, might be a significant problem for them. I can comment that AT&T Alascom does not have any such problem ... ;-) > Furthermore, these IXCs will only guarantee data transmission over > their (intrastate) digital networks of 9.6 kbps for modem and fax > users. In other words, there's no point getting a modem or fax faster > than 9.6 kbps in Alaska if you plan to use it primarily for interexchange > calls. This is because the IXCs compress multiple voice calls onto a > single channel. The compression technique doesn't work as well for > data calls. Anything faster than 9.6 will bite the dust (and in rural > areas the problem is even worse). I've been told that there is > special detection equipment that could be used to isolate the higher > speed data traffic of modem and fax users; however GCI has asserted > that installation of this equipment would increase its capital cost by > 10%. The above is true of GCI's infrastructure, but it is not true for AT&T Alascom. (However that doesn't mean all is rosey with AT&T Alascom either...) AT&T Alascom's network will handle high speed modems to over 90% (I've seen the figure, but can't remember it exactly ... 93% sounds right.) of the subscribers in Alaska, and of course to interstate locations too. I personally have and use a 28.8 modem for mostly interexchange calls. (I live in a rural location, too.) However, since most of my extended family lives in bush areas of the state, and are amongst the 5% or so who do not have modern digital service, my sympathies are perhaps weighted toward being annoyed at the poor service to small bush areas. > In your example, you speculate about analog switches as the potential > culprits. I believe that analog transmission or other non-fiber > transmission facilities could also be potential drags on through-put, That is very true. There are no analog switches of any kind still operating in Alaska. But there are some analog transmission facilities still in use. In addition to the many analog small earth stations in bush Alaska, the entire George Parks Highway north of Talkeetna to Fairbanks is served by an old analog microwave system! > particularly in rural areas. In Alaska all local and interexchange switches > are digital, however significant portions of the interexchange network are > still analog. AT&T Alascom, which is the only IXC permitted to operate > interexchange facilities statewide, There are, I believe, four IXC's permitted to operate statewide. GCI and AT&T Alascom are the only two that currently operate switching systems, but United Utilities Inc. operates a significant amount of the bush transmission infrastructure. > still uses analog transmission to about 200 of the approximately 250 > locations statewide. There is plenty of demand for switched 56 and > ISDN in rural areas, but it makes little sense for LECs to offer these > services locally if the interexchange network won't support it. I'm not sure what the precise numbers are, but the above gives a false impression. A true impression is _not_ good, just different! There are no "major" locations in Alaska served by analog transmission systems. That means there are few if any population centers with more than 500 or so people that are not digital. In the "rural" (quoted because that includes what we in Alaska would call bush and what we would call rural; two distinct entities to us) locations where digital facilities are available not one LEC offers ISDN. That would include such bush locations as Nome, Barrow, Dillingham, Bethel, and Kotzebue. AT&T Alascom has operating SW56 services to FTS-2000 customers in all of those locations. The lack of ISDN service is not primarily the fault of the IXC's, but lies with the LECs. My personal complaint is that Alascom under PTI refused to push the LECs by making neigher competative moves to bypass them, nor any other attempt to force the issue. That was an explicit management decision, not an accident. Also it is worth noting that a plan put forward in about 1990 would have essentially digitalized transmission facilties to every location within the state by 1995. Many bush locations, and specifically those with larger populations such as the list above, and those locations with the oldest analog satellite earth station equipment have been converted to digital; but for many other bush customers the complaint about poor data connections is very true. In particular the difficulties with double satellite hops for calls between nearby villages is very annoying to school systems! As bush teachers read about and attempt to implement technology that will connect students with the "information highway" they discover that calls placed over 20 year old analog systems are subject to cutoffs, dropouts, and low speed at best connections. > requirements increase. My previous question that went unanswered sought > information about whether the major IXCs also use compression on their fiber > systems. It may be that they don't. However, will fiber bandwidth always > be so inexpensive that the IXCs don't have to consider the efficiency > associated with compressing voice calls. The only domestic market with a limited fiber bandwidth is Alaska. However ... under "normal" circumstances AT&T Alascom does not compress traffic on the North Pacific Fiber cable. GCI however does, and because of that Alascom some time back filed a tariff to provide identical service to GCI, and an identical rate (cheaper than non-compressed service) in order to compete with GCI's lower priced offering! It was a basic response to customer demands. (That is also a leased line service, and has no effect on switched message traffic through AT&T Alascom facilities.) > I've been told that its possible to transport a voice call with less > than 10 kbps. Given that the standard uncompressed digital voice > circuit is 64 kbps it seems that there's a lot of room for efficiency. > If and when the IXCs decide to compress 3, 4 and 5 voice calls onto a > single 64 kbps channel, will they still be willing to carry switched > 56 and ISDN at no extra charge? In Alaska the answer has been "no." Note that the Fairbanks Municipal Utilities System not only refuses to offer digital services, they also refuse to connect to the SS7 network and offer no CLASS services at all! Imagine where ISDN is on their priority list ... AT&T Alascom Fairbanks Toll Center Floyd L. Davidson Salcha, Alaska floyd@imagi.net ------------------------------ From: mwoodlin@minn.net (Matt Woodling) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:21:42 GMT Organization: Minn Net jrubin@inforamp.net (Josh Rubin) wrote: > My query has probably already been covered in an FAQ somewhere, but > just in case, I'm wondering how a Telco could guarantee that any > particular call on an ISDN line would be digital. It strikes me that The best answer is probably that ISDN services can't be carried by analog switches. I believe that all public phone/data connections are carried over the carriers' digital networks -- this would include voice (POTS), ISDN, T1, Frame Relay, etc. Matt Woodling mwoodlin@minn.net Minneapolis, MN, USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:31:23 -0900 From: stu@shell.portal.com (Stu Jeffery) Subject: Re: Personal 800 Horror Story: PNG Telecommunications On Mon, 13 Nov 1995 08:01:43 -0800 LincMad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) wrote: > Executive summary: if you value your sanity, DO NOT sign up for 800 > number service from PNG Telecommunications, American Travel Network, > or Hospitality Services Group. They have displayed an astounding > lack of competence in completing the simplest of tasks. I don't know > what PNG is supposed to stand for, but I wonder if it's Persona Non > Grata. You sure had your problems, but I also have an 800 number from PNG and have had no trouble. Line went in smooth, bills have been correct. I also use it for checking Voice Mail and everything has been smooth. Stu Jeffery Internet: stu@shell.portal.com 1072 Seena Ave. voice: 415-966-8199 Los Altos, CA. 94024 fax: 415-966-8456 ------------------------------ From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) Subject: Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 06:07:36 GMT In article , cyberoid@u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) wrote: > Lately, all the talk in the computer industry -- and at Comdex this > week -- has been about the "Information Appliance," a concept recently > given wide publicity by Oracle CEO Larry Ellison and Sun CEO Scott > McNealy. In a nutshell, the information appliance is a small device > with a big screen, a keyboard, and the ability to call up programs and > data from a big server(s) somewhere on the Net. The idea is to get as > much stuff off the local platform as possible, to hold down the cost > and produce a simple tool capable of email, wordprocessing, Net > surfing, and graphics/sound display. Period. The microwave oven of > communications. > So far the concept has been severely criticized in the computer > industry, mostly by people who need 1GB of memory on their hard drive > just to sleep at night. No one from the telecom industry has yet > spoken out on the matter. In fact, when I was touting the idea back > in 1989 (and right up to today), the reaction from telecom executives > has been, "Huh?" Yet the concept will not fly without a big pipe > between the servers and the end users. If the 'network is the computer' (Sun (tm)), then you are now at the mercy of the network/computer. What amazes me about the 'information appliance' is that it gets rid of one of the cheapest and most useful parts of the whole system -- the large hard disk. The single biggest add-on device (behind modem upgrades due to telcom idiocy) is the large hard disk. Just look at the leader in Fry's newspaper ads -- it is a > 1Gbyte disk drive. With a large hard disk you have an infinitely customizable machine. Without it, you are at the mercy of some marketeer who doesn't know which socket of a computer to stick his finger into. A really cheap information appliance would dump the expensive Intel chip instead, which is now the single biggest cost in the entire system. www/ftp directory: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/home.html ------------------------------ From: wd6ehr@kaiwan.com (Mike Curtis) Subject: Re: Old Western Electric CPE Date: 14 Nov 1995 22:24:43 -0800 Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712) > These phones were built to last for *years* -- they might have been heavy, > but they were *sturdy*. You could spin a dial without having the phone slide > all over the table. Even with touchtones today, I find that today's > ultralight platic phones still slide around when using them. You could use > older phones as a paperweight -- when writing down a phone number on a slip > of paper, you could put a corner of the paper under the part of the phone. I've run into customers who objected to the lighter weight phones sliding around, or "these handsets feel like toys", etc. I've used various sizes and shapes of lead (e.g. sinkers, etc.), epoxied or hot-glued into place. "Red head" bolt anchors stuffed inside handsets along with some cotton, etc., to keep them from rattling around will give a "more rugged" feel to too-light handsets. Even in this day and age, we still have a very large percentage of customers with old 1A2, etc., multiline systems. We're one of the few interconnects in Los Angeles that still actually fixes them instead of recommending a new electronic key, PABX, etc., every time someone pops a B battery fuse. But every once in a while, the customer succumbs to pressure (not from us!) and tires of the "old fashioned phones" and wants a "nice shiny new system". Once installed, they're occasionally not happy with "the feel" of the newer phones. Weighting them really helps! And of course, the redheads can be easily removed once the customer has adjusted and decides that handset fatigue is a higher priority than handset weight :-) Mike Curtis wd6ehr@kaiwan.com ------------------------------ From: rec@goodnet.com (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Subject: Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? Organization: GoodNet Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:13:02 GMT Corey Hauer (hauer@deskmedia.com) wrote: > I am providing internet service to several communities in a rural > area. A very-small community serviced by GTE near one of my POPs is a > long distance call from me but a local call to another GTE-serviced > community that can call me without a long-distance charges. I want to > enable people in the small town to call my service without > long-distance charges. > Maybe mistakenly, I called GTE and asked them if I could get a line in > the community and have it forwarded to my main number. GTE told me > "no way, that would be violating the tariff". > I know of many ISPs and BBSs that use call forwarding in the same > manner to extend their service area. Is GTE correct, would I be > violating a tariff. > What could happen if I had a friend of mine in this town get a line > pointing to me? Or is GTE blowing smoke? There is another factor to consider. Will your telco forward more than one call at a time? In California, GTE there is known to only allow 1 forwarded call at a time. As far as tariff compliance, when I worked as a Service Rep at Pac*Bell, I got an executive complaint. It was a BBS operator complaining about an advertisment about another BBS advertising forwarding numbers which are residence class of service (which is flat rate, business is all measured), and the complaint is "if he can do that, why can't I". It turns out that we had to either disconnect or change the forwarding lines to business class of service. California's tariffs are still strict about business on residential service. Now I am at US West. We have a "choice" tariff. Bottom line, if you have you service in your residence, you may choose residential or business. The only determining factor is DIRECTORY advertising. If that complaint happened in US West territory, that would not have happened! Richard Eyre-Eagles, KJ7MU Tempe, Arizona ------------------------------ From: rbecker@xyplex.com (Ralph Becker) Subject: Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:39:06 GMT Organization: Xyplex Customer Support Scott Drown wrote: > I just got off the phone with the Cell-One/Boston service representative. > I tried to make a call over the weekend, and my phone wouldn't work. > It seems that I had crossed out of the Cell-One/Boston area, and was > roaming. Why wouldn't the call go through? I've roamed before in that > area? It seems that Cell-One/Boston has summarily DISABLED ROAMING on > ALL phones that have not roamed in the past XXX days. The helpful > service person did not know how long XXX was. He did inform me that > this move was to combat massive fraud in roaming. I just spoke to Cell One also. I had them check the accounts for both myself and my wife's phones; both have roaming enabled. He stated that they will automatically disable roaming if roaming is not used for six months. I asked that this "feature" be disabled from these accounts, and he did so. Ralph Becker (mailto:ralphb@iii.net) http://www.iii.net/users/ralphb ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 18:07:43 GMT Steve (stvangel@ix.netcom.com) wrote: > I had the system configured to assume my fax server was a > long-distance number, because I didn't want the call to actually go > through. The only problem was, the calls were working. The Telco was > allowing a long-distance call to a local number! > My Area-code is 314. My telco switch is 968. > My Fax number is (314) 968-xxxx, which is a local call. > I was dialing 1 314 968-xxxx, and the call was going through. Nothing mysterious here. There is a Bellcore/NANP Administration recommendation, which to its credit Southwestern Bell is following in Missouri in spite of ignoring it in other states, which states that any call, local or toll, same area code or different, should be PERMITTED to be dialed 1-NPA-NXX-XXXX (in your case, 1-314-968-XXXX). The idea is that there is a uniform, universal method for dialing the number that will work from anywhere in the North American system, provided that you are willing to pay a toll *IF* it applies. The fact that you dialed the area code did not route the call to your long distance company, nor should you pay a toll for the call if it completed. I can understand that in many areas consumers want to keep the notion that you must dial '1' for any toll call. However, what makes no sense at all is the notion that you MUST NOT dial '1' for a local call. That setup (as used in Texas, for example) serves no useful purpose. It does not protect the consumer against unwanted tolls, it only makes it more difficult to complete calls. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ From: razel@unet.net.com (Raymond Hazel) Subject: Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 15:19:49 -0800 Organization: N.E.T. In article , aresnik@execpc.com wrote: > I heard that Sprint has filed with the FCC to ignore *67 per call > blocking on interstate long distance ... that would appear to be a > direct violation of the FCC rules. Anybody know the details? I, too, am curious. I didn't know anything of *67 until I started reading this newsgroup (11/4). I actually tried it from home (510-887-xxxx) to an 800 MCI-customer number. That customer has phones with the calling number displayed on the set. With or without the *67 (although I do get a triple-beep acceptance tone), the full number was displayed. My first question is, where is there information that covers this feature? (PAT, the archives are fantastic, but *67 is a hard one to get hits on in a search...) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Nte: Discussions abotu *67 show up quite frequently in the back issues. The important point to remember is that *67 does *not* work where calls to 800 numbers are concerned; nor calls to 900/976 and certain other categories. Those places, and 800 in particular in your example, will and do get the number of the phone calling them. You cannot withhold it from them. It has nothing to do with Sprint or any other carrier. That is how 800 is set up. PAT] ------------------------------ From: prvtctzn@aol.com (Prvt Ctzn) Subject: Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? Date: 14 Nov 1995 11:42:22 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: prvtctzn@aol.com (Prvt Ctzn) I suggest that you review the FCC page on the Web that lists and details such filings. Please let me know what you learn. Robert Bulmash Private Citizen, Inc. 1/800-CUT-JUNK [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What he will learn is when dialing an 800 number, you cannot hide. Your number is known to the recipient of the call since they are paying for it. I do not think this is a thing Sprint is doing different than anyone else. On 800 calls, they provide ANI (automatic number identification) to the called party. We have covered this topic several times here. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #483 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 16 14:42:16 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA02717; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 14:42:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 14:42:16 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511161942.OAA02717@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #484 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Nov 95 14:42:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 484 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada's Story on Internet Service Provider Line Rates (Dave Leibold) Current Bell Canada Commercial Campaign (Dave Leibold) ATT5E Hunt Group Specifications (chastain@madison.tdsnet.com) Companies Plead For National Caller ID Delays (Greg Monti) Telecom Consultant Wanted (Robert F. Krepps) Private Data Network Service From ISPs (smgna@terra.sirius.com) Running Sync Signal (T1) Over Fiber? (Pete Kruckenberg) Re: Personal 800 Horror Story: PNG Telecommunications (Jeff Bein) New Area Code 320 in Minnesota (Charles Gimon) Laptop Use and PBX Baud Rates (Tom Crofford) Re: More 708/847/630 Split Details (Clifton T. Sharp) Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? (Al Varney) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n259.z1.gryn.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 15 Nov 95 22:58:40 -0500 Subject: Bell Canada's Story on Internet Service Provider Line Rates Organization: The Super Continental - North York, Canada [from Bell News, 13 Nov 95; Bell Canada's version of events follows...] Rates for Internet service providers to be adjusted To the accusation by some Internet users that we are raising our rates in an attempt to hurt Internet service providers (ISPs) who will be competing with the Internet access service soon to be launched by our WorldLinx subsidiary, we're pleading: NOT GUILTY. What the fuss is all about stems from a recent discovery that a number of Internet service providers have not been charged the appropriate tariffed rates for dial-up telephone services they were receiving from Bell. Because moving these customers to the correct rate would involve substantial increases, a number of ISPs are angry and have gone public with their concerns over the Internet. Some are working to mobilize opposition to the change from customers and government policy makers. To rectify the situation, we have developed a transition strategy to ease the impact on ISPs who have been charged incorrect rates. Effective immediately, Bell proposes to apply the correct rate only to new services. We will not move existing customers to the correct rate until May 1996. In the meantime, we will work closely with ISPs to attempt to find other ways of serving their needs, including lower price solutions. .......... More specifically... We discovered that we have been charging a number of ISPs Centrex rates, or individual business line rates, which are based on normal voice communication levels (i.e., about 10 minutes of usage per line per hour). However, since ISP usage of the telephone network is typically much higher than this (i.e., 55-60 minutes of usage per line per hour), the company must now charge business trunk rates, specifically those set out in its Information Service Access Line (ISAL) tariff. In fact, since we have discovered the error, we are legally bound to rectify it. The error applies to the majority of our ISP customers, and some other customers with similar applications. The price impact on those ISPs affected will be substantial. Today, they pay about $23 per Centrex line adn as much as $51.85 per individual business line including equivilancy for the lines they lease from Bell to provide service to their Internet customers. Under the ISAL rates, these customers could pay as much as $84.35 per line per month. The corrected rate will be comparable to that which other telephone companies charge ISPs for the same services. ---------- Fidonet: Dave Leibold 1:259/730 Internet: Dave.Leibold@f730.n259.z1.gryn.org ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n259.z1.gryn.org (Dave Leibold) Date: 15 Nov 95 22:58:48 -0500 Subject: Current Bell Canada Commercial Campaign Organization: The Super Continental - North York, Canada [from Bell News, 13 Nov 1995 - this is Bell's view of things] Latest commercials take our customers on road to the future A railway track and telephone lines brought the country together. These historic symbols serve as the backdrop in a new TV commercial introducing a new "thread in the Canadian fabric": one which will provide Canadians with new ways to communicate among ourselves, and with the world. It features our president and CEO, John McLennan explaining to our customers how we will bring the newest technologies into their lives. As part of our new mission ... the 60-second commercial will be followed by a series of three others, each highlighting new technologies we are currently involved in and/or developing - medical imaging, distance education and home entertainment. In the first commercial, which debuted last Thursday at 8 p.m. on Global, McLennan tells the public that Bell is "creating ideas and technology that will give you more choice and power than ever before... choices your parents never thought possible." The next 60 second commercial, debuting November 20, will focus on our commitment to distance education. It will show how education in the future will be accessible to everyone, no matter where they live. Featured is a part-time student living in Paris, Ontario. "As our business evolves, we must ensure our customers understand the role we want to play in bringing the future to them. We want them to be aware of how we're developing and searching for technology that will give them the power to change their lives for the better," says Bruce Barr, group vice-president, Marketing. "With our new mission in place, we need to build awareness with our business and residential customers that we're more than just a telephone line into their homes. We will continue to be the company that will bring them the newest technologies, quickly and affordably." ------------------------ Fidonet: Dave Leibold 1:259/730 Internet: Dave.Leibold@f730.n259.z1.gryn.org ------------------------------ From: chastain@madison.tdsnet.com Subject: ATT5E Hunt Group Specifications Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 08:21:00 GMT Reply-To: jac.chastain@teldta.com I am looking for the setup specifications of a rather specific hunt group on a 5E. We are a attempting to setup internet provider sites and most of the telcos we are working with have 5Es. But when I ask the telco for a hunt group I normally get a sequential hunt and I am unable to directly dial the hunt group because it is the pilot number. What I want is: 1. A virtual pilot number - no physical line associated with it or busy out that line. 2. A uniform call distribution hunt group - do not always go to the next sequential phone number for the hunt - if that modem is broke, unanswered, or whatever pick another. 3. 16, 32, 48, 64, other lines that if you dial the pilot number they will hunt - but if you directly dial each individual line it will NOT hunt and will ring busy if it is. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer. Please respond to jac.chastain@teldta.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 00:02:02 PST From: Greg Monti Subject: Companies Plead For National Caller ID Delays The November 10, 1995 issue of the electronic newsletter _Communications Today_ ran a story which said that the California Public Utilities Commission says it needs until June, 1996, to work with California phone companies to develop a plan for educating consumers about the inter-carrier pass-through of calling party name and the blocking options available. The petition was made to the FCC, which set the December 1 deadline. The PUC petition supports those of Pacific Bell and GTE California for a limited waiver of the FCC's Caller ID rules. The PUC also wants the waiver of the December 1 deadline extended to all California carriers. The story notes that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is to hear oral argument November 16 on the PUC's appeal. A provision preempting the PUC's default blocking requirement for unpublished numbers is the issue. In other national Caller ID news, Competitive Telecommunications Association (a trade organization of smaller long distance companies) has sought a waiver of the national requirement until 60 days after some of its member companies receive software patches to enable blocking of calling party numbers over SS7. Sprint also asked for a waiver (until March 1) and Southwestern Bell has opposed Sprint's waiver. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cais.com ------------------------------ From: Robert F Krepps Subject: Telecom Consultant Wanted Date: 14 Nov 1995 19:14:26 GMT Organization: Cowles Magazines We use AT&T Definity phone switches and have them networked together via private point-to-point T1 circuits. The T1 is shared between voice and data using a Cray multiplexor. We have been experiencing intermitant fade out/ drop out on the voice side between our Stamford CT office and our Harrisburg PA office. AT&T hasn't been able to help. I'm looking for a guru who knows the equipment and would be willing to work on a consultancy basis to resolve this problem. Can anyone help? ------------------------------ From: smgna@terra.sirius.com (smgna) Subject: Private Data Network Service From ISPs Date: 15 Nov 1995 00:05:34 GMT Organization: Sirius Connections Here's a topic for dicussion: Would it be plausible that Internet Service Providers may one day be a threat to private data network providers? They are building fairly large networks, a few nationwide, and are offering sophisticated services like Frame Relay. The ISP market is going to get squeezed, as the telcos and others move in. Margins are going to drop as access becomes a commodity. So why wouldn't it be natural that ISPs get into one of the telcos' businesses that they have capacity for: private/corporate data networks? Any thoughts? Technical or cost obstacles? Is it even an issue? ------------------------------ From: pete@inquo.net (Pete Kruckenberg) Subject: Running Sync Signal (T1) Over Fiber? Date: 14 Nov 1995 01:39:45 GMT Organization: inQuo Internet (801) 530-7160 I need to be able to get a sync (B8ZS, ESF T1) signal between two buildings using some existing fiber strands. I'm assuming that since there is a lot of bandwidth available on a strand of fiber, we could possibly put several async signals through a single strand. What I need to find out is where I can get such a device (hopefully inexpensively) to let me plug the 2 pairs in on one side, and extract them on the other side. It'd also be nice to be able to run some 10BaseT over the same strand, though I guess that'd be dreaming to have so much functionality in a single device. The connection will be used to connect a Cisco router in one building to an Internet access provider in the other building. We'll be connecting Adtran CSU/DSU's back-to-back. The lines from the CSU/DSU's to the fiber will be copper pairs (Cat 3 or 5). The optional 10BaseT connectivity would be used to connect back to potential customers in the same building as the provider, though doing another sync connection would work fine (it's just that Ethernet cards are cheaper than CSU/DSU's). The fiber is multi-mode, so we'd like to get as much use out of it as possible (multiple T1's, multiple 10BaseT, etc, etc). Any suggestions or recommendations are appreciated. Thanks, Pete Kruckenberg pete@inquo.net ------------------------------ From: atn@goodnet.com (Jeff Bein) Subject: Re: Personal 800 Horror Story: PNG Telecommunications Reply-To: atn@goodnet.com Organization: GoodNet Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 20:48:26 GMT To Pat, Thank you very much publishing information about our company in your newsletter. I would have loved the ability to respond to your reader's problem within the same newsletter. I would have thought that as an editor you would have gotten both sides. American Travel Network has just surpassed its 100,000th customer and our monthly revenues exceed $1.7 million per month (for Aug numbers). We try to focus on providing great programs with great rates. Our calling card at 17.5 cents per minute with no surcharge has placed us in Consumer reports, Money Magazine, American Express's Our Company, Conde Naste, National Geographic, Travel Smart as well as many other places such as CBS This Morning. It is the best calling card in the country from a major carrier (LDDS Worldcom) and it is only available from my company. We take pride that we are saving people over $2 million per month. Our 800 number as well is a great program (with 6 second billing and only 18 cents per minute). Customers save money over the major carriers as well as many smaller companies. It is true that PNG (our rebiller) has had some customer service issues. We have insisted upon better service and they now provide it. At ATN, we installed a $30,000 digital phone system, a T-1 and have an ACD group just for the 500 calls we get every day. Hold times are usually under 3 minutes and we have great audiotext to help customers. You can even try it at 800-477-9692. It is unfortunate that this customer received a level of service that is unacceptable, and I aplogize. We also have tens of thousand of customers who love us every month they save money. On behalf of our 2000 dealers and the staff of ATN, we are sorry. This person's story happened many months ago. He would have applied over six months ago. Why he wrote about it now, I do not know. Customer service is not like that today. Jeff Bein, President American Travel Network 800-705-4000 ext 101 800-477-9692 customer service 800-700-4387 fax [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your response. I appreciate your concern at having the original article and your response run at the same time. That becoems difficult at times in this media, but at the very least, responses can be published promptly, which is what I try to do. You note that Linc Madison 'must have applied several months ago, and indeed, I think he said this in his article; that he applied, heard nothing for a month or so, inquired again, and repeated this over a period of time. Re-reading his article, my impression is his problem was an ongoing one over a period of several months, not something that happened several months ago and since has been fixed. Whatever went wrong, I am sure you have corrected it, and for this I imagine Linc sends his thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gimonca@skypoint.com (Charles Gimon) Subject: New Area Code 320 in Minnesota Date: 15 Nov 1995 20:16:17 GMT Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. We just got the official brochure on area code 320 in our USWest bills up here. The new area code covers St. Cloud, Alexandria, and the rest of the 612 area code outside the greater (and I mean greater) Twin Cities area. Eight exchanges will move from 612 to 507 at the same time. There were public hearings this summer where some people, in Clear Lake for example, were complaining about having to be moved into 320. The PUC and USWest decided to let them stay in 612. The list in this brochure appears to be after that announcement, so it's most likely the final one. Also, people in Red Wing and some other southeastern towns didn't want to move into 507 -- they will stay in 612. Here's the list of exchanges: These will change from 612 to 320 starting March 17 1996, permissive dialing until September 15 1996. 202 203 214 231 233 234 235 236 238 239 240 242 243 245 246 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 259 264 265 267 268 269 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 283 284 285 286 289 294 314 324 325 327 328 329 346 352 354 355 356 358 360 363 365 366 367 369 382 383 384 387 390 392 393 394 395 396 398 453 468 485 495 523 524 528 532 543 547 548 549 554 556 558 562 563 564 567 568 573 584 587 589 592 594 596 597 598 599 629 630 632 634 654 655 656 664 668 669 676 677 679 684 685 692 693 695 697 709 732 734 743 745 746 748 749 752 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 769 792 793 795 796 826 833 834 836 837 838 839 841 842 843 845 846 847 848 852 855 857 859 864 875 876 877 886 963 965 967 968 974 978 979 981 983 986 987 995 These will change from 612 to 507 over the same dates: 237 248 326 357 364 665 756 964 All other 612 numbers will stay in 612. gimonca@skypoint.com http://www.info-nation.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:00:33 -0600 From: tomc@xeta.com (Tom Crofford) Subject: Laptop Use and PBX Baud Rates I am looking for information regarding growth in laptops owned during the past five years. I'm also looking for information about baud rates supported via POTS through commonly installed PBXs. Thanks in advance for any sources you can direct me to. Tom Crofford tomc@xeta.com 918-664-6876 fax ------------------------------ From: clifto@indep1.chi.il.us (Clifton T. Sharp) Subject: Re: More 708/847/630 Split Details Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 20:48:54 GMT In article dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) writes: > To prevent dividing Rosemont or assigning new phone numbers there, > Franklin Park and Schiller Park will follow Rosemont into 847 instead > remaining in 708 as earlier maps showed. Much of the Franklin > Park/River Grove border runs through the middles of blocks, so there > will be yet more places where next-door neighbors will need to dial > eleven digits to call one another. I'm in Schiller Park. To me, it means that I will have exactly ONE number that I call with any regularity which won't require eleven digits. (My upstairs neighbor, who I call about once every two weeks.) Even the family pagers will be moving to a different area code. Cliff Sharp WA9PDM clifto@indep1.chi.il.us ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp5.ih.att.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Call Waiting With Caller ID - Is it Actually in Place? Organization: AT&T Company number 2 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 21:23:15 GMT In article , Stephen Knight wrote: > In article , scotta@primenet.com (Scott > Atwood) wrote: >> US West in the Phoenix (AZ) area is suppose to have Call >> Waiting-Caller ID sometime before the end of the year ... (yeah right). >> I have read a few threads regarding the spec's, but all refer to the >> BellCore TR-NWT-000030 document. Is this spec available on the net, >> or libraries or does one have to shell out the $$ to receive it? > Northern's PowerTouch 350 (aka Vista 350) can do CallerID w/ Call Waiting. >> So far I have gathered that after the CW signal is sent the caller-Id >> unit must [mute the handset] , send one of the [A,B,C or D] Touch >> Tones at which time the CO will send the Caller_ID burst. > From TR-NWT-000030: > "For data transmission, however, a CPE alerting signal (CAS), > consisting of a pair of frequencies will be used. When the CPE > receives this signal correctly, it will reply with an ACK to the SPCS > indicating readiness to receive information (see SR-TSV-002476). The > SPCS will then send the relevant data to the CPE". >> Am I even close to what is necessary? > Yep. Altho, it should be pointed out that it's not limited to just the CO > sending the information (which could make for some confusion). Per USWest Network Disclosure Number 233, 7/7/95: Maybe. USWest says Type 2 CPE is compatible with this service. Type 2 handles off-hook messages and Multiple Data Message Format messages. (Please note that TR-NWT-000030 (now called GR-30-CORE) is a specification for SWITCH vendors, not CPE vendors. That is, it describes the basic Caller-ID data transmission rules from the switch perspective (loudness, open intervals, etc.). Don't build a CPE interface from that.) Instead, Bellcore has specs for CPE vendors -- describing operation from the customer line perspective. These are: SR-TSV-002476 - CPE Compatibility Considerations for the $80 Voiceband Data Transmission Interface, Issue 1, Dec. 1992 (basic Caller ID) SR-INS-002461 - CPE Compatible guidelines for the Analog $150 Display Services Interface, Issue 1, Dec. 1992 (screen display with soft keys) SR-TSV-002578 - A Method and Apparatus for Detecting a DTMF $80 signal in the presence of speech, Issue 1, Apr. 1993 (too bad some voice mail manufacturers haven't read this....) Also, specific to the Calling Identity Delivery on Call Waiting (CIDCW) service is: TR-NWT-0000575 - CLASS Feature Calling Identity Delivery on $45 total Call Waiting, Issue 1, Oct. 1992 + Revision 1, Dec. 1994 (delivery of caller name & number) GR-416-CORE, Call Waiting Deluxe, Issue 1, Apr. 1995 $85 Bellcore is on 1-800-521-CORE, USWest contact for CPE vendors for this service is James Reynolds on 602-351-5292. There is no additional charge to customers with both Call Waiting & Caller Identification. (!!!) Al Varney ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #484 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 16 16:32:45 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA11125; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 16:32:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 16:32:45 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511162132.QAA11125@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #485 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Nov 95 16:32:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 485 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Some BellSouth Notes (Stanley Cline) Re: Some BellSouth Notes (Ronell Elkayam) Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? (Oppenheimer) Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? (Jim Borynec) Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? (Giles Heron) Re: Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? (G Novosielski) Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? (Mark Cuccia) Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? (Ed Ellers) Re: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Juha Veijalainen) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: scline@chattanooga.net (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Some BellSouth Notes Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 22:52:56 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Mark Cuccia wrote: > Even Bell's payphones don't allow 10-XXX-1+ route to other carriers > since not many other carriers provide true Coin service. They only > exception I've run across (other than reading about the PA/NJ & NJ/NY > corridors) is 10-288-1+ InTRA-LATA. I haven't tried 10-732+1+404... > from a Bell payphone yet to see what happens, tho. BUT I tried it from > my Cellular phone (both 10-732-1+404... AND 10-732+404... without the > 1+. I forgot to try 10-732+0+404...) Instead of getting BellSouth > Mobility's 504+seven-digit trunk number (which I did get on > 800-MY-ANI-IS), I got a ten-digit quoteback of MY OWN Cellular's > number!!! I wonder if the PBX here allowed me to access that number- > if I'd get an outgoing trunk of the PBX or if I'd get the actual > dial-in 'extension' number. Mark, if you dialed 1+404xxx from your BellSouth cellphone, you would in fact hear your own number. I have called people from my cellphone and they have seen my REAL cell number. But if I used ANI-IS, I'd get the trunk ID. (My IXC is LCI International) Also with LCI, I see the NAME of the caller if they're in a BellSouth area and have LCI. I have tried this with my LCI 800# and calling card, and IT STILL WORKS! Seems odd that BellSouth allows 10xxx+1+ on cellular there. They do not here. They DO allow 10xxx+*0*+ for card, colletc. etc. But we have an ancient Motorola EMX that I wish they'd get RID OF. Stanley ------------------------------ From: relkay01@fiu.edu (Ronell Elkayam) Subject: Re: Some BellSouth Notes Date: 16 Nov 1995 03:32:14 GMT Organization: The People's Voice, 305-937-6468 On Tue, 14 Nov 95 14:37:00 CST, Mark Cuccia (email: mcuccia@law.tulane. edu) posted: > The call yesterday showed up in Uppercase as NASSAUZN08, NY. I've > heard that many inter-LATA calls won't always show the customer > name, but rather the city (ratecenter) and state. I even had a > *local* call show up as (and I'm not misplacing punctuation here): > NEWORLEANS ,LA The CID name-fields of these calls probably weren't sent as uppercase, but rather sent as lowercase, and only shown as uppercase on your Caller ID box which doesn't support lowercase. I have the AT&T 85, and a BelTronics 100. The AT&T 85 can't display lowercase. The BelTronics will show some calls as lowercase -- the AT&T will show the same call as uppercase. I've logged over 17,000 CID entries on my voice board, and have never seen a city&state name sent as uppercase. I've seen "north dade ,fl", "miami, fl", etc. All of these calls came from new phone subscribers. Eventually, the person's name replaced the location in the name-field. Some of the strangest CID names I've seen are " " (15 blanks, NOT no-name-message-AKA-15-dashes), " ANYNAME " (started in a space), and about 10% of the calls had a name field smaller than the 15 character limit. Most calls (of subscribers whose name is smaller than 15 chars) are padded with spaces at the end, so you'd receive "JOHN SMITH ". CID-names that are of locations always showed in lowercase, and were never padded with spaces at the end (but I've only seen 305 calls of that nature). I've also had calls from "HOME DEPOT " which were actually from the payphones at Home Depot. W/love, | Owner & Programmer: The People's Voice BBS @ 305-937-6468 | No pregnant women or heart-conditioned senior citizens are Ron | allowed. Under 42 must get parents' permission to call. Miami, FL | "THIS IS WHAT YOUR MOTHER ALWAYS WARNED YOU ABOUT" Don't bother to call... FCC disconnected the line on basis of board being "obscene". New number coming soon! Tapes avail. ------------------------------ From: producer@pipeline.com (Judith Oppenheimer) Subject: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? Date: 15 Nov 1995 12:38:44 -0500 Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM) In comp.dcom.telecom Pat Townson said: > I'd like to see the same push for universal service which drove the > telcos in the early years of this century now become a driving force > on the Internet. > If I were to win a lottery ... I would see to it that that every > public school and every public library in Chicago was hooked to the > net immediatly with 'information appliance' type devices. Pat, put me down for New York. Judith Oppenheimer, President Interactive CallBrand(TM): Strategic Leadership, Competitive Intelligence Producer@pipeline.com. Ph: +1 800 The Expert. Fax: +1 212 684-2714. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sure, and I will put you down for Los Angeles also while I am thinking about it. Let's face it, it isn't going to happen anytime soon. I *barely* manage to keep this Digest up and running along with meeting my limited (very limited these days!) personal expenses these days. I have decided this Digest will probably be the extent of my contribution to the net, at least as things look now. Still though, I can't help but dream about what *could* be done, if only the money was present. After all these years, we still do not have a Freenet in place here. Long ago I wanted to work on that. I've also thought about starting an organization for new publishers and moderators, to help them get the software in place they need and develop electronic journals of their choosing. Lotsa luck! First I need to worry about keeping my own phone bill paid and my own journal moving each day. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jborynec@agt.net (Jim Borynec) Subject: Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 00:48:57 GMT Organization: AGT Ltd. hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) wrote: > A really cheap information appliance would dump the expensive Intel chip > instead, which is now the single biggest cost in the entire system. For me, this is just not true. My single biggest cost is memory. 16M of memory cost me almost twice my 100Mhz 486 CPU expense. Does anyone know why memory prices haven't fallen at the same rate that CPU prices have fallen? What's the scoop? The technology curves would see to indicate that memory would get cheaper faster than CPU's (after all memory chips are "easier to design".) j.b. ------------------------------ From: gheron@clear.co.nz (Giles Heron) Subject: Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? Date: 16 Nov 1995 00:33:50 GMT Organization: CLEAR Communications Limited Reply-To: gheron@clear.co.nz (Giles Heron) In , hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes: > With a large hard disk you have an infinitely customizable machine. > Without it, you are at the mercy of some marketeer who doesn't know > which socket of a computer to stick his finger into. The problem is that only "techies" seem to know how to customise their machines without getting into strife. I'm sure the computer helpdesk here at CLEAR would *love* to remove all the customizations from user's machines! Developers could always have a second box to hack around to their hearts' content (it's in our nature...) In the home environment companies could compete to offer the central server you connect to. That way you can always change if you don't like what you're getting. With the Hot Java technology you'd only be beholden on the central server to bootstrap your box anyway. IMHO the only reason to have a disk on a networked PC is lack of communications bandwidth or server capacity. This is where the Telecom world comes in (bandwidth), and Oracle and Sun get all excited (server capacity). The only risk is 100% reliance on the network and the server -- but it seems we're 99% reliant on them already. In the office sufficient bandwidth could be here soon. In the home you might have to wait a while! > A really cheap information appliance would dump the expensive Intel chip > instead, which is now the single biggest cost in the entire system. But this is only true because people are so obsessed with CPU speed, and neglect more important factors like memory and I/O. The 24MB RAM on this desktop is worth a lot more than the DX2/66 CPU! It suits Intel just fine to have us believe that CPU speed is the single most important performance factor (so we'll make it "the single biggest cost in the entire system") Nevertheless, given that an "information appliance" could drop Windows there wouldn't be any need for x86 code -- and you could go for the best price/performance CPU. Giles Heron CLEAR Communications, Auckland, New Zealand gheron@clear.co.nz ph +64 9 912 4462 fax +64 9 912 4176 ------------------------------ From: gary.novosielski@sbaonline.gov Organization: Small Business Administration Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 19:27:13 -0400 Subject: Re: Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? Reply-To: gnovosielski@mcimail.com Here in 201-land (Northern NJ) 11-digit (1+ten) dialing is accepted by the local switch for any number, from local up to and including long-distance. The way it works *here* (your mileage may vary) is that the number is handled by a long-distance carrier *only* if it is truly an inter-LATA number. Local numbers are handled as local ("free") calls, even if the full 1+ten number is dialed, and short-distance non-local calls are handled by Bell Atlantic (BA) by default. I routinely program all 11 digits in my modem and tone-dialer, (making travel easier) and they've never caused a difference on my phone bill. Local calls do not show up at all. There is no time delay, audible difference, or clue of any kind which would lead me to suspect that 11-digit calls are being handled any differently than 7-digit calls (and I've got a pretty good "ear"). Of course, like (Steve), I have had no luck getting any hard information out of my local customer service reps, apart from dumfounded silence. But that's not the whole story. We do have the beginnings of competition here. We can now route short-distance calls on carriers other than BA by dialing the 10xxx Carrier Access Code (CAC) first, on home-npa or 908 (Central NJ) calls, (which are intra-LATA in spite of the area code). I'd suspect that choosing a carrier for a truly local call *would* result in being charged for it, but I haven't verified that. The strange thing is, if I *do* use a CAC, I can no longer dial 11 digits for all calls. I *must* dial 7-digit (i.e., 201) calls as 10xxx+seven only. Otherwise, the call is intercepted, and I get: " We're sorry; the number you dialed cannot be reached with the carrier access code you dialed. Please check the number, or call your carrier for assistance." which is pretty misleading. In truth, the number *can* be reached with the carrier access code I dialed, as long as I leave out the 1-201. Gary Novosielski GPN Consulting gnovosielski@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 09:56:00 CST Los Angeles was a major Step-by-step city for a number of years, and I would guess it was started to have dial phones back in the twenties (in Bell exchanges). But how do we define Los Angeles? Is it the actual city limits of the City of LA? or is it Los Angeles *County*? or is it the Southern California metro area. And how contained was Southern California at any particular time in question? Southern California also has various parts served by Pac*Bell with other areas served by GTE. I remember reading here in TD that there were *competitive* independent telcos in the Southern California area back before WW-II. Independent telcos were the ones who invented & developed (stepper) dial service back in the 1890's and early 1900's. Bell areas began to have customer dial in 1919, and *that* original operation used Automatic Electric (GTE) manufactured equipment as well as AE engineers to install it. Bell (WECO) Panel equipment began to be cut into service in the early 1920's in many areas, and Bell/WECO *did* devolop its standards and manufacturing for Step switching. But I have read that the Independents in Southern California had dial service *prior* to Bell's exchanges, probably in the 1900's and 1910's. As for '39-forever' Jack Benny, mentioned in Andrew C. Green's post (acg@frame.com), I think that the switchboard operators Gertrude and Mabel (who also made cameos in the 1950's on Jack's TV show) were *PBX* switchboard operators. Jack Benny's radio and TV shows were unique in that they were about Jack Benny, star of Stage-Screen-Radio-Violin , and later TV, and had episodes of his life at home and at the radio (or TV) studio. The PBX operators Gertrude and Mabel were characters in the program who 'worked' for The National Broadcasting Company when Jack's radio program ran on NBC, while they 'worked' for The Columbia Broadcasting System when Jack's radio (and later TV) program were on CBS. But just because an city/town had dial service didn't mean that *all* exchanges were dial. The New Orleans local calling area *still* had three manual exchanges as late as 1955- UPtown, ALgiers, WAlnut. And many locations cut only one or two manuals to dial at any one time. A previously 100% manual local area would only have one or two of its several exchanges cut to dial for the first time, while the bulk of exchanges would remain manual. There would be later cuts to dial here and there, while *new* exchanges (dial) were being added -- both in new suburbs, as well as new exchanges being added (overlayed) to existing manual exchange Central Business District areas to handle growing traffic. Eventually there would be only one remaining manual exchange in a city, and when telco announced that it would be cut to dial, there might be media attention (Newspaper, radio, and even TV) lamenting about this 'loss'. Compare this to the 1920's or 30's when a the first dial office was cut from manual in a particular city -- the local press would applaud and cheer this new technology. This seems to be how most local exchange service existed in many cities/towns from the 1920's thru the 1950's, and by the early 1960's most manual exchanges had already been cut to dial. As for Los Angeles, I hadn't yet made any posts on subject, as I don't know all of the specific EXchange names or when they were introduced, although I have enjoyed reading the various posts, and I do hear some quoted in old Radio/TV/Movies if the story took place in Los Angeles itself. Also, Southern California is *quite* complex, with various local and toll zones within an urban/metro area. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A very good, very funny movie starring Jack Benny made about 1945 was titled "The Horn Blows at Midnight". Does anyone remember it? A native of Waukegan, Illinois here in the north suburban Chicago area, Jack Benny was always very funny just playing and being *himself*. Like Oliver Hardy, he was always the straight man imposed upon by those around him. PAT] ------------------------------ From: edellers@shivasys.com (Ed Ellers) Subject: Re: When Did Los Angeles Get Dial Phones? Date: 16 Nov 1995 02:22:38 GMT Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [Usenet News Server for hire] In article , wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com says... > As they thought of adding subscriber toll dialing, they had to develop their > own version, since Bell Labs (and Western Electric) were not supporting > anything of the sort for step offices. After all, those were only in small > and unimportant places, and large cities and metropolitan areas were what > the Labs cared about. FWIW there used to be a rather drastic lack of communication between the Bell operating companies and Bell Labs; the BOCs could of course talk to Western, and WECo could work closely with Bell Labs, but the BOCs were not allowed to have any discussions with BTL unless in a meeting attended by a representative from AT&T headquarters! This changed shortly after the Chicago central office fire of 1975. > In 1948 almost all of the Los Angeles metropolitan area was dial, probably > no "almost" to it. > After all, Oklahoma City, where I live, has been all dial since 1928. Lucky Okies! By comparison, Louisville got its first dial service in 1930 (shortly after Southern Bell, having absorbed a competing independent, built its new downtown building) and finally cut over from the last manual office in (so help me) 1959. We got long-distance dialing in the early 1960s; the first ESS was cut over in 1975, and the last crossbar office in the metro area went down in the mid-1980s. (Most of the old Louisville COs were step-by-step; unlike some other areas, we never had Touch-Tone service except in the crossbar offices until each ESS cutover, and even in the areas that had crossbar switches some customers had to change phone numbers to get Touch-Tone because the offices were part crossbar and part step-by-step. Fortunately we never had mixed ESS/electromechanical in each area, though now at least one office is part 1A ESS and part Northern Telecom DMS.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was *no* Chicago central office fire in 1975. The big fire in Chicago was in May, 1988. Perhaps you are thinking of the big central office fire in Manhattan, New York. That would have been about 1975 or so. Another telco fire which has been largely forgotten was in the early 1960's at Richmond, Indiana which was then an all manual exchange. It was a small, privately owned independent telco at the time. With nowhere near the money needed to rebuild and restore service -- even with their insurance -- the fire essentially forced the telco into bankruptcy. I beleive the day of the fire itself -- Easter Sunday about 1962 or so -- the owners sold out to Indiana Bell. Anyone remember the details on this? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Juha Veijalainen Subject: Re: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (was Re: Bell Atlantic) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:05:23 +0200 Jeroen Doucet wrote: > franz@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Franz) wrote: >> As far as I know, all European GSM networks are caller-pays. > But what happens if you call me from Italy on my Dutch GSM while I am in > Greece? And if I am in France and use my Dutch GSM to call my French > neighbour on his French GSM? Nobody knows. 1. Caller pays international charge from Italy to Holland. Dutch GSM owner pays a fixed per minute charge for receiving the call in Greece. 2. If you use your Dutch GSM in France to call a French GSM phone, your Dutch phone will be charged the local GSM tariff for that call. Also, there is a 5 % surcharge if you make outgoing calls when roaming. This is how I'm charged, as far as I know (my home network is Telecom Finland). Charges for receiving calls depend on where you are roaming. The basic rule is the longer the distance from your home country, the more you pay. Juha Veijalainen (Helsinki, Finland) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #485 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 16 21:19:53 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id VAA01237; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:19:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 21:19:53 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511170219.VAA01237@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #486 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Nov 95 21:20:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 486 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? (S. Bapat) Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? (Eric Ewanco) Selling an 800 Number (Gary D. Shapiro) Device to Forward Calls to a Cell Phone? (Christopher Zguris) Any Scoop on Sprint Outage? (goodmans@delphi.com) Need a Bridge With Good Temp Specs (Greg Herlein) ISDN and SLCs (Herman Pickens) Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? (Chris Gettings) Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? (Babu Mengelepouti) Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? (Ed Ellers) Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? (J. Giles) Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? (Daniel Ganek) Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? (Brian Elfert) Last Laugh! Usenet and the Path to Salvation (Gary Bouwkamp) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bapat@gate.net (S. Bapat) Subject: Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? Date: 16 Nov 1995 03:49:43 -0500 In article , aresnik@execpc.com wrote: > I heard that Sprint has filed with the FCC to ignore *67 per call > blocking on interstate long distance ... that would appear to be a > direct violation of the FCC rules. Anybody know the details? Apparently Sprint has filed with the FCC for an exemption from respecting *67. The ostensible reason is the new software Sprint has in its switches is smarter than it ought to be. According to the filing, if the software encounters a blank callerID field, it assumes that it must be because the originating LEC is some small hick rural telco that cannot supply callerID. So, it grabs the ANI, substitutes it for the callerID, and delivers it in-band to the called party as regular callerID. Sprint claims it cannot distinguish whether the callerID field is blank because the telco cannot supply it, or because it is blocked. It also apparently argues that its switches cannot be reprogrammed to respect *67 without excessive expense. (I for one do not believe this line of argument). As a side note, the state of California has claimed that it cannot permit any callerID to be transmitted by the IXCs out of California or interLATA within California, since it has not had time for a public education program to alert its population to the change. Therefore, the rollout of nationwide CallerID may be postponed yet again from its current Dec 1 scheduled date. Subodh Bapat bapat@gate.net ------------------------------ From: eje@xyplex.com (Eric Ewanco) Subject: Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? Date: 15 Nov 1995 20:03:02 GMT Organization: XYPLEX > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What he will learn is when dialing an > 800 number, you cannot hide. Your number is known to the recipient of > the call since they are paying for it. I do not think this is a > thing Sprint is doing different than anyone else. On 800 calls, they > provide ANI (automatic number identification) to the called party. > We have covered this topic several times here. PAT] What I wonder is why businesses have had access to inter-LATA, non-blockable caller identification for many years but your average Joe has to put up with Caller ID which is not only blockable, and not only intra-LATA only (virtually, though that hopefully will change next month), but even then only of spotty coverage within the LATA. If I order an 800 line in my home (since residential 800 has become quite common), can I get full service ANI? Or do you have to get the full service, costly business WATS line with special hardware? Eric Ewanco eje@world.std.com Software Engineer, Xyplex Inc. Littleton, Mass. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is not big companies versus little people although it would be convenient for a lot of people around here if it could be dealt with in that way. It is a matter of *who* is paying for the phone calls. On calls *you* pay for (regardless of who originates the call) then yes indeed, you get the details since you are entitled to know what you are paying for. Regards residential 800 numbers, we who have them do indeed get a list of what numbers called us. If it is satisfactory to get this in the form of a printout once per month with your bill, then there is no extra charge. If we want to have it delivered in realtime when the call is going on, there is an extra charge, just as there is an extra charge for Caller-ID now. It does not matter if you are a residence or business user, you pay for it and you can have it. In reality however, most residential users would not have any need for realtime delivery of ANI on their 800 number unless they could get it for free or next to nothing. It is sort of an expensive service relative to what most 800 residece users are paying otherwise. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gshapiro@rain.org (Gary D. Shapiro) Subject: Selling an 800 Number Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 11:19:35 -0800 Organization: Emperor Clothing Co. I have an 800 number that spells something that some company MIGHT want. Are there brokers for such a thing or am I on my own? Or do I just wait until someone decides they want it and discover that I have it? Gary D. Shapiro http://www.rain.org/~gshapiro/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know of any brokers, so I guess you are on your own. And I would not wait too long, since by next April or so when the supply is *really* running short, expect a few of the major players on the business side to be so frantic about the situation that they try a power-play to force telco to move all the residence users out of 800 and into 888, freeing up a few hundred thousand 'traditional' toll-free numbers in order to postpone the inevitable for themselves. Like the *small* handful of businesses in downtown Chicago who insisted it would be better that the other two million, nine hundred thousand residents of the city change their area code (and in about a hundred thousand cases the entire phone number as well) in order that they would not have to purchase new stationary or otherwise risk anything different, expect a lot of commotions when big -- really big, nationwide in scope -- businesses finally realize they can't have just any 800 number they want anytime they please. A lot of people in Chicago are greatly annoyed by the 312/773 split, especially when they found out their choices in some neighborhoods would be to have neighbors on both sides of them with a different area code *or* have their own number changed so that everyone in the immediate vicinity would be in the same area. Exactly why they could not have taken the dozen or so largest businesses downtown and put *them* in 773 leaving everyone else alone remains a mystery. Technically speaking, your number is not yours to sell. Read the tariff. Telco can grab it back at any time they choose to do so in the conduct of their business. I guess someone could use money to convince you to turn off your 800 service, thus making the number available for someone else, but you probably would begin the process by advertising the number and saying in effect that you are willing to consider discontinuing your 800 service. Note, you cannot legally say you have the number 'for sale'; at least I don't think you can. I think all you can say is you are willing to discuss discontinuing your service via that number and that you can make no representations or promises that telco will assign it to the company/person with whom you are discussing the matter, however you will take the money up front and in consideration appoint them as your representative or give them your power of attorney to deal with the telco on your behalf in having the number disconnected where you are concerned. Legally then you are not selling the number which some would contend is not yours to sell; you are just giving a quit-claim to any rights that still others might contend you have by telco's assignment of the number to you. Obviously you make no warranties of any kind about who telco will assign the number to *next*, if anyone at all. Naturally there is some administrative expense involved you need to have covered; you will want your calls courteously referred for some period of time to a new number; but most important, you want the money up-front before you give them a quit-claim or power of attorney to act on your behalf with telco. What happens at that point is between them and telco. Especially if it is a large corporation, *make them pay first*, so they cannot weasel out of it if telco won't go along. Naturally you have to say *what number* it is that you think you may be disconnecting, and that you will accept sealed bids from anyone interes- ted in convincing you to do so. Say NOTHING about 'this number may be of value, etc ...'. Remember the value is not yours to sell. Any value derived is coincidental to your decision to turn off your service. Part of your administrative expense will be the large number of people who now choose to call the number to discuss your offer, just to chat and snoop around, etc. The winning bidder has to pay those costs also. Good luck! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 13:14:32 -0800 From: czguris@ix.netcom.com (Christopher Zguris) Subject: Device to Forward Calls to a Cell Phone? What I'm looking for is a device that will hook up to my primary telephone line so that when someone dials my telephone, the device will call out to my cell phone (dialing on a second line, of course). If I pick up the cell phone, I'd like the device to connect me to the caller. If I don't, I'd like the answering machine to pick up. I'm sure I could build such a device, but I'd prefer not to. I'm thinking this is a pretty common application for cell phones, so _please_ tell me there's a simple device out there to solve my problems! Christopher Zguris, czguris@ix.netcom.com -or- czguris@mcimail.com or any one of several other addresses/variations BEAR RESISTANT FOOD CONTAINERS Made of high impact ABS plastic with stainless steel latches. The container is entirely flush and cannot be opened unless the bear has a coin or screwdriver. - CAMPMOR catalog, Spring 1995, page 65 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why would re-inventing the wheel in this way be preferable to using telco's call-forwarding service with a transfer to some other number (voicemail?) on no answer? PAT] ------------------------------ From: goodmans@delphi.com Subject: Any Scoop on Sprint Outage? Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 23:31:23 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Anyone have any info regarding an outage Sprint had last week on their Internet services? I thought it was just an isolated case but a friend was OOS last week in Arizona at the same I was down in South Carolina (coincidence?) Thanks. ------------------------------ From: gherlein@crl.com (Greg Herlein) Subject: Need a Bridge With Good Temp Specs Date: 15 Nov 1995 19:06:24 -0800 Organization: CRL Network Services (415) 705-6060 [Login: guest] I am in the very early stage of specifying some equipment for a project. I need to bridge a small LAN at a remote site to a local site. The remote site might get very warm in the summer - I have yet to figure the exact temperature specs I need, but it will certainly be hotter than a typical air conditioned wiring closet! Can anyone recommend a good bridge that will accept 10BaseT on one side and a leased line on the other, that has good to excellent temperature range? Thanks in advance, and vendors are welcome to reply! Greg gherlein@crl.com ------------------------------ From: hpickens@hiwaay.net (Herman Pickens) Subject: ISDN and SLCs Date: 16 Nov 1995 02:47:53 GMT Organization: HiWAAY Information Services The telephone company tells me I can't get ISDN because the SLC that serves my area is a Mode 2 and what we need is a Mode 1. Does this denote T1 versus PRI? We have ISDN where we are now and use it for simple testing of ISDN products. The problem stated above relates to where we want to move the business. Any enlightenment would be welcome. Herman L. Pickens ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 09:28:03 -0700 From: gettings@econnect.net (Chris Gettings) Subject: Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? This practice developed into a full blown industry in Canada because there is no measured service for business lines. Hundreds of small companies, and a few large ones such as Metrowide/ACC Long Distance and Distributel built extensive "networks" of centrexes which call forward between local calling areas. They use a PC with caller id boards to allow only subscribers with valid accounts to dial a second number in the city after dialing the call forwarding number. The problem is that the CO gets pretty full and the "exchange hopper" only paid for a single line in each exchange. They changed the tariff to charge based on the number of calls up at one time, and the CRTC (Canada's FCC) ruled that one hop was legal, multiple hops was not. (Imagine, hopping across an entire state or province!). Chris Gettings Internet: gettings@econnect.net Tel: (416) 585-2626 Fax: (416) 585-2242 Visit us on the World Wide Web: http:/www.econnect.net ------------------------------ From: walkerrb@www.hendrix.edu (Babu Mengelepouti) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 22:48:22 CST Subject: Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? > I was talking on the phone with my mom tonight and she read a piece of mail > to me. Mom lives in Pittsburgh (412), and this flyer from AT&T was > encouraging her to use 10ATT + 412 XXX YYYY for all the *toll* calls she > is going to make in the Pittsburgh area. > Now this seems a bit strange because 1) it's kind of complicated to have to > use 10xxx + AC to dial what is basically a local call and 2) Pittsburgh has > a pretty wide local calling area, so local toll calls are unusual. Is this > AT&T first step into the local market? AT&T is undoubtedly doing this to steal intra-LATA toll calls from the LEC. However, it can have the unexpected effect of customers being billed for calls that should be free, if they dial the carrier access code prior to a local number. In the Portland (OR) area, USWest and GTE have blocked local calls from being routed through long distance carriers, due to customer complaints about such practices. Incidentally, when I compared AT&T's intra-LATA rates to the LEC, I found their rates to be anywhere from 15-25% HIGHER. Sprint, on the other hand, charges their flat rate of 10 cents per minute on the Sprint Sense plan for calls within or outside the LATA (I'm not sure it's supposed to work that way but it does if you use the Sprint carrier access code for intra-LATA toll calls). Often, this is substantially cheaper than the LEC -- in Arizona, for instance, for calls between Phoenix and Tempe. Be wary of carriers encouraging you to use carrier access codes ... they are rarely offering a good deal when they do so. This whole thing brings to mind Wiltel's phone sex scam: 10555+1+305/450.7877. The call only goes through using Wiltel and they charge something like $3.00 per minute for the call. Actually this is kind of clever, because the call is billed like a direct-dialled long distance phone call. Sure, the charge is exorbitant ... but they don't have to worry about uncollectibles like with 900 numbers; there is no law against charging high rates (I used to administer a PBX that got broken into, and we got billed for some of these types of calls by Wiltel and Pilgrim Telephone). Rob I'm calling from Saudi Arabia... walkerrb@www.hendrix.edu ------------------------------ From: edellers@shivasys.com (Ed Ellers) Subject: Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? Date: 16 Nov 1995 02:26:50 GMT Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [Usenet News Server for hire] In article , theseus@dgs.dgsys.com says: > I was talking on the phone with my mom tonight and she read a piece of mail > to me. Mom lives in Pittsburgh (412), and this flyer from AT&T was > encouraging her to use 10ATT + 412 XXX YYYY for all the *toll* calls she is > going to make in the Pittsburgh area. > Now this seems a bit strange because 1) it's kind of complicated to have to > use 10xxx + AC to dial what is basically a local call and 2) Pittsburgh has > a pretty wide local calling area, so local toll calls are unusual. Is this > AT&T first step into the local market? It does seem nonsensical -- what's happening here is that AT&T is simply providing intra-LATA service now that the commission in Pennsylvania is allowing it. Probably when she makes a call like this it will go to the AT&T point of presence, be switched and go back into the local network from the same POP without ever traveling over AT&T's "Long Lines;" it's possible that they are able to do this more cheaply, even after paying for the connection to the local network, than the phone company can do under current tariffs. ------------------------------ From: jgiles@mail.sdsu.edu (Giles) Subject: Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 02:46:15 GMT Organization: SDSU We've been using 10ATT (10288) - NXX - XXXX for quite a while now. In Southern California at least, you don't have to dial the area code for local calls, but you do of course have to dial the 10288 code to get on the AT&T network, bypassing Pacific Bell. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What have been the results? How would you compare your bills now and several months ago before you started this procedure? PAT] ------------------------------ From: ganek@apollo.hp.com (Daniel Ganek) Subject: Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:27:22 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA In article madnix.uucp!zaphod@ nicmad.nicolet.com (Ron Bean) writes: > My employer periodically hands out a magazine that consists > mainly of useless factoids. Sometimes I scan it briefly before I > throw it away. This item recently caught my eye: > "Your risk of being in an automobile accident increases 34% if > you have a cellular phone in your car." > Source: Rochester Institute of Technology. > That's a pretty amazing statistic, if it's true. Do insurance > companies charge extra if you have a cellphone? Don't know about insurance companies -- but the first thing a lawyer will do is get the cell phone records to see if either party was on the phone when an accident occurs. ------------------------------ From: tclbbs@parka.winternet.com (Brian Elfert) Subject: Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? Date: 16 Nov 95 02:47:16 GMT Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc A short article on this very subject was in today's newspaper. In 1991, the accident report form that all police departments in the state use was amended to include use of cellular phone as a contribuating factor in an accident. A cellular phone was a contributing factor in only .1% of accidents since 1991. Brian ------------------------------ From: gbouwkamp@allnet.com Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 16:35:53 EST Subject: Last Laugh! Usenet and the Path to Salvation Pat, When I saw this I couldn't help but think that you would appreciate it, judging by some of your past comments on Usenet groups. Gary Bouwkamp Frontier Communications [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for passing it along. The author is unknown. I hope everyone enjoys it. PAT] --------------- NETNEWS: SERIOUS BUSINESS A woman approached the Pearly Gates, and Saint Peter asked for her social security number. The woman told him, and Saint Peter typed on his workstation: pearly-gates:^/peter grep 212-53-6432 /earth/human/status The computer responded: 212-53-6432 Cindy Smith cms@dragon.com!earth naughty pearly-gates:^/peter Saint Peter then told her she was eternally damned, and that a mini-van to hell would be arriving shortly. Cindy began to protest. "But what did I do wrong? I loved my fellow neighbor as I loved myself, I was a kind, warm, gentle person! Surely there must be a mistake!" So, Saint Peter looked up on the files, and saw, lo and behold that she truly was a kind, warm, gentle person...until he saw the entry for jan 7, 1994-earth, which read: ***DAMNABLE VIOLATION #69*** Posted irrelevant article to newsgroup. After probing a little more, Saint Peter explained to the woman, "It seems that on Jan. 7, 1992 you posted an article to Alt.religion.computers. This article gave no praise of Emacs, no snide remarks toward Microsoft, and not even a comment on the proper definition of 'hacker'! In fact, the article was not even relating to computers at all, and discussed, of all things, human religion! There wasn't even a reference to Bob or Discordianism, Zen, or the Tao of programming. Oh, dear! This is terrible." "You see, heaven is a perfect place, and we only have room for the most perfect people. Ever since we ran the T-3 line up from New Jersey we've been particularly harsh on breakers of netiquette. Didn't you read RFC-23654? The one proposing commandments 11 through 15?" He opened up an XTerm window and searched for some files. After a few moments, the laser printer spat out a crisp sheet of paper. It read: 11: Thou shalt not flame spelling or grammar. 12: Thou shalt not have a .sig file longer than 3 lines. 13: Thou shalt not send "All fags must die" messages to 19 random groups. 14: Thou shalt not request post a frequently asked question. 15: Thou shalt not post to a group without first reading a week's worth of posts, thereby avoiding irrelevant articles. 16: Thou shall not post administrative requests to the main list. When he was done, she began to stammer, but Saint Peter stopped her, saying "I'm sorry. There's nothing I can do. To register a complaint, you'll have to send mail to: status-change-request@godvax.heaven.com We have a group of cherubim who manage such requests. But don't send it to: status-change@godvax.heaven.com otherwise your request will be distributed to the whole mailing list. They HATE that! In fact, there's some discussion about making that the 16th commandment..." At that point, a Dodge minivan drove up and came to a stop. Satan, in the form of an IBM salesperson, stepped out. "Welcome!" she said. "We've been waiting for you..." Cindy, almost in a trance, stepped into the minivan and was whisked away to the netherworld, a world of COBOL, System 36's, punch cards, incompatible network standards, and irresponsible news posters. Satan turned to Cindy, and smiled. "You'll like it here," she said. "We have netnews, but we've greatly simplified it. We have only one group; it's: alt.talk.sci.comp.soc.rec.misc!" --------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just one thing more: I wonder if Chick Publications has considered printing one of their comic-book tracts based on this little parable? Everyone have a great weekend in case we don't chat again before Monday. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #486 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 16 23:44:16 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA11339; Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:44:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 23:44:16 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511170444.XAA11339@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #487 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Nov 95 23:44:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 487 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: ATT5E Hunt Group Specifications (D. Ptasnik) GSM in America: How Far Along? (Paul Bishop) Re: Bell South Notes (Stan Schwartz) Re: Using Cellular Phones to Link Classroom to Outside World (Ed Ellers) Re: My Rights Against US West? (Ed Ellers) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Babu Mengelepouti) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Steve Schear) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Richard Kenshalo) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Kenneth Blackney) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Linc Madison) Re: Canadian vs US Long Distance Rates (msal765@aol.com) Re: Research Sources Wanted on Telecom Companies (msal@aol.com) Re: The Killer Application Myth (Lionel Ancelet) Re: Belgian Phonebooks Now Online! (A. Okapuu-von Ve) Re: Private Data Network Service From ISPs (Tony Harminc) Re: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Axel Schmidt) France Telecom New Web Page (Philippe Montubert) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: davep@u.washington.edu (D. Ptasnik) Subject: Re: ATT5E Hunt Group Specifications Date: 16 Nov 1995 22:33:31 GMT Organization: University of Washington You want a Terminal Hunt Group. This first line should have tariff HSHPG. Each subsequent line should have the tarrif HSGPN. This blocks hunting to the next number when dialing a specific line in the group. Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: phbishop@aol.com (Phbishop) Subject: GSM in America: How Far Along? Date: 16 Nov 1995 19:11:19 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: phbishop@aol.com (Phbishop) Can anyone provide an update on the status of GSM/PCS1900 standardization in the U.S.? I know that ANSI has standardized the 1.9 MHz air interface (J.STD-007), but I am not sure about the operational and numbering issues such as: -Phone numbers: Will the North American Numbering Plan be extended to assign an NDC to each network? If so, have NDCs been assigned? -What about the subscriber number (IMSI) ? There is a portion called the MNC, which also identifies each GSM network. Have PCS1900 operators been assigned MNCs? - The IMSI is also prefixed with a Mobile Country Code, which is usually different from the Country Code used in the phone number. What is the MCC for [USA/Canada/Caribbean]? - Will PCS1900 operators use the GSM TAP format for roaming records, or will they use CTIA’s CIBER? - Is an Equipment Identity Register (EIR) being set up? Who will administer it? I am curious to know which of these have been resolved, and which forum has decided or will decide, (Bellcore, ANSI, TIA, CTIA, PCIA etc.). I would like to make contact with anyone who is involved with the standardization process. Paul Bishop pbishop@spade.mhs.compuserve.com +1 214-776-5672 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 19:34:43 EST From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Re: Bell South Notes Someone at Bell South must be reading the Digest. A while back, someone asked why the RBOCs don't list new area codes in the bills. Bell South did this month. The insert first explains the new format area codes and has a cut-away view of a map of the Southeaster US with the new regions highlighted. They describe the changes as follows (most of this information has already appeared in lists in the Digest): Alabama: 334 was introduced 1/15/95 Florida: 954 was introduced 9/11/95 352 will be introduced in the Gainesville area on 12/3/95 Georgia: 770 was introduced 8/1/95 South Carolina: 864 will be introduced in northwestern SC on 12/3/95 Tennessee: 423 was introduced 9/11/95 There's also a quick Telecom quiz (if anyone's interested I'll post it). In the answering my own question department, ANOTHER insert in this months bill was dedicated to CID/CID Deluxe (name/number). Some interesting facts: - The first 15 characters, last name first, of the primary listing are displayed. In the case of a dual listing, the first 15 characters of the dual listing, also last name first, are displayed. - Bell South reiterates the 12/1/95 interstate CID cutover - "Beyond that date, for most calls made from BellSouth locations, both the name and the number of the calling party will be delivered. For calls made from locations not served by BellSouth, the telephone number an the caller's city and state will be displayed." I don't remember ever hearing about the city and state rule, but that might explain why I'm seeing "Charlotte, NC" on some calls while they get some kinks worked out. Stan ------------------------------ From: edellers@shivasys.com (Ed Ellers) Subject: Re: Using Cellular Phones to Link Classroom to Outside World Date: 16 Nov 1995 02:11:43 GMT Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [Usenet News Server for hire] In article , ndallen@io.org says: > A Florida cellular company is helping a school in Fort Myers use cellular > phones to link classrooms with the outside world. It's a cute idea, > although I suspect most schols need other things a lot more than they need > cellular phones. Still, I suppose anything that increase school-parent > communication has some value. I smell a publicity stunt here on the part of the cellular carrier -- it would probably have been easier to install a small PBX and extensions in each classroom, then use maybe one or two extra CO lines per school, than to pay for cellular air time charges. (For that matter, schools in some areas have had intercom phones in each classroom for decades, although the actual systems vary. The Louisville school district used to have a Stromberg Carlson PBX in each school with dialless 554-style wall phones in the classrooms, allowing teachers to call the front office or be switched to other classrooms. When I was in school these were not interconnected to telco lines for various reasons, but they could be now. Considering that teachers and students occassionally get shot at in class -- as happened today in a Tennessee high school -- having at least 911 access would seem prudent!) ------------------------------ From: edellers@shivasys.com (Ed Ellers) Subject: Re: My Rights Against US West? Date: 16 Nov 1995 02:33:43 GMT Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [Usenet News Server for hire] In article , pete@inquo.net says: > Second come management complaints. These are people that have called > the chairman of the board at telco or the president. Typically, what > he knows about telephony could be stated in a few sentences or less. Maybe, maybe not. I'm reminded of an incident (perhaps apocryphal) in the 1920s when the CEO of a major New York bank had phone trouble in his office and asked his secretary to call New York Telephone to report the problem. She asked who at NYTel she should call, and was sarcastically told to call the president of AT&T. The next day a man in work uniform showed up and dropped his box of tools, loudly, on the executive's carpet. It was AT&T president Walter S. Gifford. :-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 20:21:06 -0600 From: walkerrb@www.hendrix.edu (Babu Mengelepouti) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? > Furthermore, these IXCs will only guarantee data transmission over > their (intrastate) digital networks of 9.6 kbps for modem and fax > users. In other words, there's no point getting a modem or fax faster > than 9.6 kbps in Alaska if you plan to use it primarily for interexchange > calls. This is because the IXCs compress multiple voice calls onto a > single channel. The compression technique doesn't work as well for > data calls. Anything faster than 9.6 will bite the dust (and in rural > areas the problem is even worse). I've been told that there is > special detection equipment that could be used to isolate the higher > speed data traffic of modem and fax users; however GCI has asserted > that installation of this equipment would increase its capital cost by > 10%. It is very curious that GCI asserts this given that one of their techs told me that they already intercept all FAX calls, store them at the local toll centre, then block transmit them to the lower 48 via leased line. If they can already do it for faxes I don't see how detecting data is any different. They may be evasive about this because they want to initiate service in bush areas using their 1-metre satellite dishes (I spoke to a tech in Washington DC who was lobbying Congress to do this -- he also told me about the interception of FAX calls), which have limited bandwidth. I'd be interested to hear if anyone knows anything more about this. I'm calling from Saudi Arabia... walkerrb@www.hendrix.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 19:34:28 -0700 From: azur@netcom.com (Steve Schear) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? All communication media are analog. The physics of the universe aren't digital, so any signal in it is therefore analog. What is commonly called digital is only a coding system whose physical expression, in whatever transmission medium (sound, electromagnetic, etc.) is analog. :-) Steve ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:03:57 -0900 From: Philip J. Treuer (via apuc@alaska.net) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:35:37 -0900 From: kenshalo@anc.ak.net To: treuerpj@alaska.net Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? I read your comments in Telecom Digest, and being a fellow Alaskan interested in Switched-56 service, I have a few questions for you. At Matanuska Telephone Association, we interface with Alascom/AT&T over their analog microwave radio facilities. We currently send non-switched 56 special circuits over Trans-mux facilities, which implement the DS-1 digital multiplexed service over the FDM facility. This seems to work fine. My understanding for switched-56 service, is that the CPE is technology dependent (Type I, Type II, or Type III), but if the switched service could be hauled from the customer, to the nearest end-office that supported the switched-56 service (probably Type I, 4-wire), once into the IXC network, end-to-end service is possible, even with ISDN, since switched-56 is defined as one of the bearer services for ISDN. The end office has to establish dedicated trunk groups, with special routing that allows only digital facilities terminating on digital switches throughout the IXC network. This is done by using routing codes and switch translations. With SS7, dedicated trunk groups are not required. So, as the LEC, if we could provide switched-56 OCUDP channels to Alascom/AT&T at the DS-1 level, and they could provide the routing codes and switch translations necessary via dedicated trunk groups, this service should be possible throughout the state, as long as the LEC can offer the service, and as long as Alascom/AT&T can provide a Trans-mux to carry the DS-1 over their analog micro-wave. I would appreciate your comments on this. Feel free to forward this to the Digest if you think others would be interested. Richard Kenshalo Matanuska Telephone Association ------------------------------ From: ksb@noc.ocs.drexel.edu (Kenneth S. Blackney) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: 13 Nov 1995 20:20:56 GMT Organization: Drexel Univ Telecom & Networking Gordon Burditt (gordon@sneaky.lerctr.org) wrote: > This announcement of caller-pays cellular service leaves out one very > important part: how do I block calls to caller-pays cellular numbers? As the person who does the billing here at Drexel, I had the same concern. My Bell rep just returned my call and provided the following information: 1. Bell Atlantic is offering this service to other carriers, not to end users. 2. The other carriers (Comcast, Bell Atl/Nynex Cellular, etc) can buy the service then offer it to their subscribers. 3. No one is using the service yet and won't be for two to three months. My rep explained to the product manager that customers like us (who do internal bill-back) have reservations about this service since we don't and can't know how much to bill. For what it's worth, they are looking into this. (Why is it that phone companies (carriers and equipment manufacturers) always act as if I'm the first customer who ever thought of something. "Oh, no one ever asked us that before," is all I ever hear.) Ken ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 18:57:28 GMT Christian Weisgerber (naddy@mips.pfalz.de) wrote: > Steve Cogorno writes: >> I'd be pretty annoyed too. If someone wants me to call them on >> *their* cellular phone for *their* conveinence, then *they* should pay >> the airtime charges. > Well, the polite way to do it is this: ... use call forwarding to transfer > calls from your regular line to your cell phone. Thus, the caller pays > the same as always, and you pay for the "luxury" of receiving the call > on your cell phone. This brings up a question about the "caller-pays" cellular setups in the U.S. Suppose I forward my POTS line to my cell phone on a caller-pays setup. Since I forwarded the call, I will pay the cost of the airtime on my bill for the POTS line. However, it seems to me, from what I've heard, that the original caller will still hear the "you will be billed for airtime" recorded message when the call is transferred. Is there some provision for squashing the recording in such a situation? It seems like it would be common enough that there should be some accommodation made. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ From: msal765@aol.com (MSal765) Subject: Re: Canadian vs US Long Distance Rates Date: 15 Nov 1995 13:38:05 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: msal765@aol.com (MSal765) If you are interested in long distance telephone rates around the world you might want to call on a company that tracks tariff and services data for PTT's and Carriers in over 200 countries. They are LYNX Technologies and their WWW site can be found at http://www.lynxtech.com - check it out! Hope this helps, MitchS. ------------------------------ From: msal765@aol.com (MSal765) Subject: Re: Research Sources Wanted on Telecom Companies Date: 15 Nov 1995 13:37:41 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: msal765@aol.com (MSal765) There is a company in the US that primarily tracks tariffs and services from PTT's and carriers around the world, but they also as a subset have data on the addresses, phone and fax numbers of these telecom carriers as well as background and financial data from annual reports. This is a for profit organization so you would have to pay for the info, but give them a try anyway. They are LYNX Technologies, Inc. and their phone number is (201) 256-7200. Or check out them on the internet at WWW.LYNXTECH.COM. Hope this helps, MarcS. ------------------------------ From: la@well.com (Lionel Ancelet) Subject: Re: The Killer Application Myth Reply-To: la@well.com Organization: The Well Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 19:27:29 GMT cstrnadl@austria.cp.philips.com (Christoph F. Strnadl) wrote: > The one application (or idea therof) I have come across which may has > a fair chance to be eventually realised and become something like a > killer application could be the following: > Idea: Home ATM: > * phone with smartcard reader > * user has a stored value smartcard (aka electronic purse) > * user dials into his home-banking application somewhere on the > (POTS!!) network and transfers money from his bank account to > his electronic purse > This is not home-banking per se but, as a matter of fact, just one > single application of a possible home-banking package. It is, though, > a feature which to my opinion offers tremendous added value to the > user, don't you think? The device you describe already exists in France. It is a recent generation of Minitel terminals with a built-in smartcard reader. These were launched on the French market about one year ago. Before that, you could always attach an external smartcard reader to any Minitel, through a kind of serial port. Don't forget that charge cards (VISA) have had embedded chips for years in France. And that home banking (account statement, transfer, bill paying) from your Minitel (or computer) has been existing for years there as well as in many european countries. These two technologies (smart cards and computer-based home banking) seem to be only emerging now in the US. Interestingly enough, in France there are smartcard readers in many phone booths now, since most of them can be used with prepaid calling smartcards, charge cards, or regular calling smartcards with the added functionality of being able to be "refilled" with money for phone calls. This is the electronic purse. I think some banks in other countries like Spain have been studying the smartcard-based electronic purse years ago, and might very well be using it now. If anyone living in Spain can confirm that. Lionel [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For quite a long time Citibank in New York has had a program where you can pay your bills at home using your computer. I think it must have started at least 10-12 years ago. You can also transfer funds between accounts, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: A. Okapuu-von Veh Subject: Re: Belgian Phonebooks Now Online! Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 19:09:04 EST Hello, FYI, Swiss phone books have been available for quite some time at telnet etv.switch.ch, login as etv. You can search on just about anything, including number -> name and address lookup. Alex Okapuu-von Veh - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - McGill University 3480 University St. - Montreal, QC, CANADA - H3A 2A7 Ph: (514) 398-5993 - Fax: 398-7348 Hydro Quebec: (514) 251-4263 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 19:09:16 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Private Data Network Service From ISPs smgna@terra.sirius.com wrote: > Here's a topic for dicussion: Would it be plausible that Internet > Service Providers may one day be a threat to private data network > providers? They are building fairly large networks, a few nationwide, > and are offering sophisticated services like Frame Relay. The ISP > market is going to get squeezed, as the telcos and others move in. > Margins are going to drop as access becomes a commodity. So why > wouldn't it be natural that ISPs get into one of the telcos' businesses > that they have capacity for: private/corporate data networks? It's already happening in a way. The corporate parent of the company I work for is using Compuserve's network for its worldwide dial-in needs. This has nothing to do with regular Compuserve or CIS, but uses the same local phone numbers for SLIP access to the corporate systems. It's not much of a stretch to imagine a few leased lines coming into use to connect remote offices. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: axel@pobox.com (Axel Schmidt) Subject: Re: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (was Re: Bell Atlantic) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 03:16:12 GMT Organization: ZyNet Southwest > But what happens if you call me from Italy on my Dutch GSM while I > am in Greece? I pay Italy --> Netherlands. You pay your provider's rate for calls received in other EU countries. > And if I am in France and use my Dutch GSM to call my French > neighbour on his French GSM? Nobody knows. You'd pay the rate for calls within France issued by the network provider you chose when you switched on your phone. Regards, Axel Schmidt ------------------------------ From: Philippe MONTUBERT Subject: France Telecom new Web Date: 15 Nov 1995 16:32:47 GMT Organization: Oleane - PIPEX Internatinal France Telecom has a new Web site in USA. Try a look at : http://www.francetelecom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #487 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 17 08:59:11 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA01576; Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:59:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:59:11 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511171359.IAA01576@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #488 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Nov 95 08:59:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 488 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Updated GSM List 11-17-95 (Jurgen Morhofer) The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Bill McMullin) Keeping an 800 Number (was: Selling an 800 Number) (Paulo Santos) Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) (James E. Bellaire) Re: Some Bell South Notes (Carl Moore) Re: Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? (David H. Close) Fiber to the Home (David Harvey) Fiber Competitive Access Providers List (Norman Gillaspie) Dates of Start of 411 and Directory Assistance vs. Information (Doug Faunt) IP Traffic vs Telco Traffic (Kim Scheinberg) SxS Switch Can Wanted (Wil Dixon) Re: ISDN and SLCs (Al Gonsalves) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:22:30 +0100 From: Jurgen Morhofer Subject: Updated GSM List 11-17-1995 For the latest edition of this list look at my Web-Site: http://www.cs.tu-berlin.de/~jutta/gsm/gsm-list.html kindly supplied by Jutta Degener. (Changes in the list marked by "*") Date 1995-11-17. Country Operator name Network code Tel to customer service ------ ------------- ------------ ----------------------- Andorra STA-Mobiland 213 03 Int + 376 824 115 Argentina Australia Optus 505 02 Int + 61 2 978 5678 Telecom/Telstra 505 01 Int + 61 18 01 8287 Vodafone 505 03 Int + 61 2 415 7236 Austria PTV Austria 232 01 Int + 43 222 79744 Bahrain Batelco Belgium Belgacom 206 01 Int + 32 2205 4000 Brunei Cameroon China * Guangdong MCC * Guangxi PTB * Liaoning PPTA Croatia Cyprus CYTA 280 01 Int + 371 2 567 764 Denmark Sonofon 238 02 Int + 45 80 20 21 00 Tele Danmark Mobil 238 01 Int + 45 80 20 20 20 Egypt Estonia EMT 248 01 Int + 372 639 7130 Int + 372 524 7000 Radiolinja Eesti 248 02 Int + 372 639 9966 Fiji Finland Radiolinja 244 05 Int + 358 800 95050 Telecom 244 91 Int + 358 800 7000 France France Telecom 208 01 Int + 33 1 44 62 14 81 SFR 208 10 Int + 33 1 44 16 20 16 Germany D1, DeTeMobil 262 01 Int + 49 511 288 0171 D2, Mannesmann 262 02 Int + 49 172 1212 Gibraltar GibTel 266 01 Int + 350 58 102 000 G Britain Cellnet 234 10 Int + 44 860 321321 Vodafone 234 15 Int + 44 836 1100 Jersey Telecom 234 50 Int + 44 1534 88 28 82 Guernsey Telecom Manx Telecom Greece Panafon 202 05 Int + 30 944 00 122 STET 202 10 Int + 30 93 333 333 Hong Kong HK HTCLGSM 454 04 SmarTone 454 06 Int + 852 2880 2688 Telecom CSL 454 00 Int + 852 2803 8450 Hungary Pannon GSM 216 01 Int + 36 1 270 4120 Westel 900 216 30 Int + 36 30 303 100 Iceland Post & Simi 274 01 Int + 354 96 330 India PT SATELINDO Indonesia TELKOMSEL 510 10 Int=A0+ 62 778 455 455 Satelindo 510 01 Iran T.C.I. Ireland Eircell 272 01 Int + 353 42 31999 Israel Cellcom Israel Ltd Int + 972 2 795944 Italy Omnitel 222 10 Int + 39 2 41431 Telecom Italia Mobile 222 01 Int + 39 6615 20309 Japan Kuwait MTC 419 02 Int + 965 484 2000 Laos Latvia LMT 247 01 Int + 371 2256 7764 Int + 371 2256 9183 Int + 371 2934 0000 Lebanon Libancell 415 03 Liechtenstein Natel-D 228 01 Lithuania Comilet Luxembourg P&T LUXGSM 270 01 Int + 352 4088 7088 Lybia Orbit Macao * CTM 455 01 Int + 853 833833 Malaysia Celcom 502 19 Binariang 502 02 Malta Advanced Marocco O.N.P.T. 604 01=20 Monaco France Telecom 208 01 Int + 33 1 44 62 14 81 SFR 208 10 Int + 33 1 44 16 20 16 Namibia MTC 649 01 Int + 264 81 121212 Netherlands PTT Netherlands 204 08 Int + 31 350 688 699 Libertel 204 04 Int + 31 6 0500 New Zealand Bell South 530 01 Int + 64 9 357 5100 Nigeria Norway NetCom 242 02 Int + 47 92 00 01 68 TeleNor Mobil 242 01 Int + 47 22 03 03 01 Oman Pakistan Mobile Communications =20 Phillipines Globe Telecom 515 02 Islacom 515 01=20 Portugal Telecel 268 01 Int + 351 931 1212 TMN 268 06 Int + 351 1 793 91 78 Qatar Q-Tel 427 01 Int + 974 325 333 Rumania Russia Mobile Tele... Moscow 250 01 Int + 7 095 915-7734 United Telecom Moscow =20 NW GSM, St. Petersburg 250 02 Int + 7 812 528 4747 SaudiArabia Saudi Telecom=20 Singapore Singapore Telecom 525 01 Int + 65 738 0123 Slovenia South Africa MTN 655 10 Int + 27 11 445 6000 Vodacom 655 01 Int + 27 82 111 Sri Lanka MTN Networks Pvt Ltd Spain Airtel Telefonica Spain 214 07 Int + 34 1 336 3300 Sweden Comviq 240 07 Int + 46 586 686 10 Europolitan 240 08 Int + 46 708 22 22 22 Telia 240 01 Int + 46 771 91 03 50 Switzerland PTT Switzerland 228 01 Int + 41 46 05 64 64 Syria SYR MOBILE SYR 263 09 Taiwan Tanzania Thailand TH AIS GSM 520 01 Int + 66 2 299 6440 Turkey Telsim 286 02 Int + 90 212 288 7850 Turkcell 286 01 Int + 90 800 211 0211 UAE UAE ETISALAT-G1 424 01 UAE ETISALAT-G2 424 02 Uganda Vietnam * MTSC Zimbabwe Many Thanks to Kimmo Ketolainen and Robert Lindh for their precious help! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:19:09 -0500 From: bill@interactive.ns.ca (Bill McMullin) Subject: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Wouldn't it be great to solve the problems of the digital poor? I agree with our Canadian friend who questions the high cost of memory. How could anything produced in such mass quantity cost so much? If they are trying to make use believe it is a commodity subject to supply and demand, why isn't it traded on the stock market? (Maybe it is, help me here.) I would like a critique of this please ... Everyone on the Net and all those in telecom are very much handicapped by the high cost of RAM. We all have a need for memory and most always have a need for *more*. If we had more at less cost we could likely be more innovative with the products and services we create and also provide the less than fortunate with access to computing power. Why don't we mobilize an effort to create the Community RAM Company. Collectively, all the people on the Net (or a significant percentage of them) could do one of two things: 1) lobby the RAM manufacturers for more reasonable pricing (a big buying group). 2) initiate a business effort to create a company, financed by the Internet community, and possibly other members, to manufacturer RAM, either by buying a RAM manufacturer or creating one. I realize this is pretty off the wall but I think the Net has finally created a way for a lot of people with little effort to mobilize and organize themselves. Additionally, the Internet community collectively has a lot of money even if only a small amount from each person was contributed. Any contributor would become a shareholder of the Community RAM Company. Anyone who could not afford to be a shareholder would receive the benefit of affordable RAM as long as they could prove their economic position. I would love to here thoughts from our TELECOM Digest Members. Bill McMullin bill@interactive.ns.ca InterActive Telecom Ph: 902-832-1611 1550 Bedford Hwy. Fx: 902-832-1015 Sun Tower Suite 604 Bedford, Nova Scotia B4A 1E6 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well what you say certainly has some merit. But I think the prices will come down, even without a dedicated effort by net people to make it happen. Personally I think we will see complete desk top computer systems in the price range of $100- $200 within a year or two. Remember how the very first small shirt poccket size calculators cost $500? Remember the Texas Instruments programmable calculators that cost a couple hundred dollars when the other less sophisticated models had been reduced in cost to 'only' $50-75 each? Remember how Apple ][ computers sold for $1000 in 1979-80? Watch and see if it does not happen again. Imagine a 486 for a hundred dollars; complete, ready to run. Maybe the cost won't *quite* get that low, but aren't we seeing alrealy lots of discount computer places with systems which used to cost well in excess of two thousand dollars now priced less than one thousand? I'll bet we go out of this century with the USA almost completely wired up and connected to the net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pas@cc.gatech.edu (Paulo Santos) Subject: Keeping an 800 Number (was: Selling an 800 Number) Date: 17 Nov 1995 07:28:12 -0500 Organization: College of Computing, Georgia Tech Our Moderator wrote about 800 numbers: > Technically speaking, your number is not yours to sell. Read the tariff. > Telco can grab it back at any time they choose to do so in the conduct > of their business. Really? Let's see. I have an 800 number that is a vanity number (it spells something). I paid money to be able to select my own number way back in the days when prefix determined long distance company. I even had to endure for several years a carrier for my 800 number that was not my first choice just to have that number. Are you saying that now *telco* (who is telco, anyway?) can just come and take away my number just because someone else wants it? I find that hard to believe, and if it is true, it is extremely unfair. Also, what tariff are you referring to? Since 800 numbers are not owned by any specific telco, it can't be a telco-specific tariff, can it? I would agree that the tariffs may say that telco may change my number if operational demands require so. For example, if all 800 numbers were changed from seven to eight digits, I'd have to accept changing my number. If all 800 numbers moved to 888, I'd have to accept that too. But can they take away my number just to sell it to the someone else? Will they do the same for me and get me 800-VID-BARE if I claim that I need it? Paulo Santos Email: pas@cc.gatech.edu College of Computing Georgia Tech Voice: +1 404 853-9393 Atlanta GA 30332-0280, USA Fax: +1 404 853-0673 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 'Telco' is just a generic term which refers to telephone companies and long distance carriers in general. And no, I don't think they would be brassy or nervy enough to just take your number and sell it to someone else. You can bet though, that in any situation where re-numbering is required they'll change your number in a minute if it suits them. And re-numbering can be required for a variety of reasons, one being that very very large accounts of telco (major corporations, etc) need to obtain new numbers, etc. I doubt it will be a situation where a large company says specifically 'we want that particular 800 number' and telco will pull it from you and give it to them. I rather think it will be a case where the large corporations prevail on telco to give them exclusive use of the 800 space making all residence users move to 888. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 03:12:25 -0500 From: James E. Bellaire Subject: Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) In Telecom Digest V15 #485 Pat noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was *no* Chicago central office > fire in 1975. The big fire in Chicago was in May, 1988. Perhaps you > are thinking of the big central office fire in Manhattan, New York. > That would have been about 1975 or so. Another telco fire which has > been largely forgotten was in the early 1960's at Richmond, Indiana > which was then an all manual exchange. It was a small, privately owned > independent telco at the time. With nowhere near the money needed to > rebuild and restore service -- even with their insurance -- the > fire essentially forced the telco into bankruptcy. I beleive the day > of the fire itself -- Easter Sunday about 1962 or so -- the owners > sold out to Indiana Bell. Anyone remember the details on this? PAT] Richmond Indiana is served by GTE North. It is the main city in what GTE calls the 'RIchmond LATA" and GTE has all but a handful of the exchanges in that area. Ameritech/Indiana Bell has no COs in the Richmond area. Other GTE Notes: GTE is still slowly spreading across Indiana, purchasing COs from smaller nationals and independents. They are still changing signs south of Fort Wayne where they bought out AllTel a couple years ago. In the far south of Indiana (just as in Central Illinois) GTE does business as Contel. GTE Mobilnet Cellular covers most of Indiana, using the Contel Cellular name (and some bad switches, based on the roamer's access responces) in Contel telephone areas. Now if they would only upgrade their switches in the little towns east of Fort Wayne and around LaPorte. You can still place a local call within your CO by dialing the last five digits, forcing out of CO local calls to use a 44+ or 3+ prefix. Come on GTE, this is 1995!! James E. Bellaire (JEB6) Twin Kings Communications bellaire@tk.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You make it sound like a disease or a fungus when you phrase it that way: 'they are spreading slowly across northern Indiana' ... okay so I was wrong on Indiana Bell taking over Richmond, but you missed the point. Do you recall the fire in Richmond and the little independent that had the exchange there before it burned down? I still am pretty certain however that emergency restoral was done by Bell; I almost distinctly recall hearing that Bell sent in crews that Sunday morning from Indianapolis to set up temporary facilities. More details, any old-timers? Also James, which telco has Westville, Indiana? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 23:19:06 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Some BellSouth Notes Stan Schwartz wrote about calls from Charlotte, NC to Fort Mill, SC and vice versa. Years ago (and it may still be the case), places in old area 215 just outside the Phila. metro exchanges could get Philadelphia metro service, but a call TO those places from Philadelphia (and more distant parts of suburbs) was toll. For example, West Chester is outside, but next door to, the Phila. metro exchanges. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Another bit of historical trivia here regarding the Fort Mill Telephone Company. Does anyone remember the suit they filed against Bell about fifteen years ago or so regards their territorial boundaries? You may recall (heck, how could you forget!) Jim and Tammy Baakker, the television preachers. Charlotte and Fort Mill -- or actually sort of in-between the two -- is where they had their resort. One end of it was in Bell territory near the Charlotte exchange, but the other end of it (the one big hotel of theirs) was at the other end, in Fort Mill Telephone Company territory. Bell tried to serve the entire complex (which is what the Baakker's wanted as I recall reading), but Fort Mill was not eager to lose all the business they would get from phone traffic out of that resort hotel which quite distinctly fell on their side of the boundary. The Baakkers had a PBX -- a rather massive one -- which encompassed the entire grounds of their resort including the hotel which was served with outside lines from Bell. Fort Mill Telephone Company sued to force them to have Ft. Mill lines terminate on the PBX where the hotel was concerned. The way it finally wound up as I recall was the entire resort was served by Bell, however you could call direct into the switchboard at the hotel *either* by dialing the main PBX operator and asking for the hotel (switch- board operator) *or* by dialing a seven digit Ft. Mill number which were lines that terminated directly on the hotel switchboard itself. The hotel was the only part of the resort which physically sat in Fort Mill's territory. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu (David H. Close) Subject: Re: Local Dialing and Long-Distance Dialing - Same Thing? Date: 16 Nov 1995 07:22:27 GMT Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena stvangel@ix.netcom.com (Steve) writes: > My Fax number is (314) 968-xxxx, which is a local call. > I was dialing 1 314 968-xxxx, and the call was going through. Works everywhere in PacBell land. Treated as a local call and handled by PacBell, not your PIC. Nice. PacBell also permits you to dial 10xxx1NXXyyyzzzz for local calls. But in those cases, the call is handled by the selected IXC and billed as a toll call. Not so nice. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu ------------------------------ From: dlharvey@ix.netcom.com (David Harvey) Subject: Fiber to the home Date: 17 Nov 1995 03:41:55 GMT Organization: Netcom I am researching the feasability ot FTTH (fiber-to-the-home) and not having a lot of luck finding detailed technical papers or writeups. Does anyone know a good source (hopefully online) that I can use? Thanks a lot! ------------------------------ From: norman@pagesat.net (Norman Gillaspie) Subject: Fiber Competitive Access Providers List Date: 17 Nov 1995 12:53:44 GMT Organization: Pagesat, Inc. Is there an online list of competitive access providers? In particular fiber companies that sell access to other carriers? Is there any fiber between Chicago and Des Moines, IA? Norman Gillaspie norman@pagesat.net For information regarding Pagesat's Satellite delivered usenet news mail info request to "info@pagesat.net" or try our web server at http://www.pagesat.net Delivering a near realtime 360+ megabytes of Netnews, 150,000 messages and 16,000 groups each day via satellite ------------------------------ From: faunt@netcom.com (Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604) Subject: Dates of Start of 411 and Directory Assistance vs. Information Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 04:28:43 GMT When did 411 get to be the standard number for Directory Assistance/Information? What was used before that? When was Information renamed to Directory Assistance? 73, doug ------------------------------ From: ikuo@panix.com (Kim Scheinberg) Subject: IP Traffic vs Telco Traffic Date: 16 Nov 1995 20:08:02 -0500 Organization: Obiter dictum I recall the graph recently which mapped growth in web traffic and voice traffic. At current growth rates, it suggest the former exceeds the latter by 1998. This raises a bigger issue, though. How, exactly, is the net cutting into the core business of the telco's? Is AT&T worried? Should they be? Has anyone done any sort of study on this? Surely there's a master's thesis in here somewhere ... -k. ------------------------------ From: wildixon@tampico.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) Subject: SxS Switch Can Wanted Date: 16 Nov 1995 13:00:15 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana I'm looking for a SxS line finder, line switch, etcetera for a static display. Wil ------------------------------ From: Al Gonsalves Subject: Re: ISDN and SLCs Date: 17 Nov 1995 12:58:14 GMT Organization: North Shore Access/Eco Software, Inc; (info@shore.net) hpickens@hiwaay.net (Herman Pickens) wrote: > The telephone company tells me I can't get ISDN because the SLC that > serves my area is a Mode 2 and what we need is a Mode 1. Does this > denote T1 versus PRI? We have ISDN where we are now and use it for > simple testing of ISDN products. The problem stated above relates to > where we want to move the business. Any enlightenment would be welcome. Mode 2 refers to a configuration of SLC(R) that concentrates the traffic at a 2:1 ratio. This allows telcos to carry 96 channels of traffic over 2 T1 lines instead of the four required in Mode 1. The primary Mode 2 application is in low traffic residential areas. Since the use of Mode 2 is not widespread, these systems were not redesigned to support ISDN when it became available on local digital switches. Even if they were upgraded to handle BRITE card technology, your one ISDN line would tie up 3 channels, making them unavailable to the other subscribers served by the system. As more ISDN lines are added, the call blocking probability would begin to reach unacceptable levels. Your telco would probably have to upgrade their cable feeder facilities to accomodate the added bandwidth required for the upgrade to Mode 1. Unless you have lots of lines, this would not be economical for them. Al Gonsalves ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #488 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 20 02:05:36 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA06754; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 02:05:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 02:05:36 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511200705.CAA06754@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #489 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Nov 95 02:05:30 EST Volume 15 : Issue 489 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Fires its First Shot (Mark Cuccia) Some More Notes on CID (Mark Cuccia) Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? (R IT Brown) Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? (Sam Spens Clason) Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? (Peter M. Weiss) Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming (Sany M. Zakharia) Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming (K. M. Peterson) Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? (Clifton T. Sharp) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Re: AT&T Fires its First Shot Date: Sun, 19 Nov 95 23:07:00 CST Here in Louisiana, we have had feature group D' inTRA-LATA competition ever since Fall 1991 when the PSC ordered that Bell (and equal access capable independents) unblock' 10-XXX+1/0+ inTRA-LATA. The majors (AT&T, Sprint, MCI, etc) *are* cheaper than Bell for these calls. The non-AT&T IXC's ( other' common carriers have always been available for fg.A access or fg.B (950-) access calls within the LATA, as well as some fg-B like access using fg.D codes (cut-thru) dialing (10-XXX+ the # button), and then touchtoning in the number and authorization code, as well as having an 800 number access. Operator take-back' and 00 after) were completed but at Bell's rates, and the charges showed on the Bell inTRA-LATA pages of the bill. Prior to Operator take-back, *all* traditional 0+ facilities for Bell were handled by AT&T's TSPS system. I could do sequence' calling card calls to *any* point, in *any* order- local, inTRA-LATA toll, inTER-LATA toll. If the call was a Bell' call, the charges would show up on the Bell pages- if the charges were inTER-LATA, the charges would show up on the AT&T part of the bill. After Operator take-back' (1986 or so here in Louisiana), 0+ calls would route to Bell's TOPS if the (NPA)-NXX following were inTRA-LATA, while they would route to AT&T (or the PIC'd IXC) if the (NPA)-NXX was out of the LATA. For AT&T, I *could* continue with inTRA-LATA sequence calls (including local) and switch back & forth with further inTER-LATA sequence calls. Again, the inTRA-LATA calls would show up on Bell's part of the bill. BUT if the initial 0+(NPA)-NXX was within the LATA, I would route to Bell's TOPS, and sequence calls would be restricted to inTRA-LATA (NPA)-NXX points *only*. Sometime around 1989, AT&T implemented OSPS to serve this area. AT&T would *not* allow me sequence calls to inTRA-LATA points, and the AT&T operator would *not* complete calls to points in the LATA unless there were an emergency'. In Fall 1991, when the PSC ordered 10-XXX+ unblocking for inTRA-LATA calls, I *was* able to place sequence calls' to InTRA-LATA points via AT&T, as long as the *initial* 0+NPA-NXX-XXXX call was inTER LATA, or I prefixed the 0+ with 10-288+. However, Bell has blocked the use of 10-XXX calls for NPA-NXX locations that are actual local calls. This doesn't preclude the use of fg.A, fg.B (950), 10-XXX+# or 1-800 access numbers to a carrier to place a call to a local point. *All* IXC's have rates *higher* than Bell for calls to *local* points. Bell's local card rate is something like 88 cents FLAT, while all other IXC's charge by the minute with higher per-minute rates. COCOTS are *known* to dial-out' the call (via 1-800 or 950) to their AOS', even tho' the end-user entered a simple 0- or 0+local withOUT any 10-XXX prefix. I myself received a flier from AT&T about a week ago explaining that 10-288 could be used for what they call local-area toll calls', yet I've been able to do this since Fall 1991. The flier *does* mention that while AT&T's rates are *lower* than Bell for local-area *toll* calls, their rates *could* be higher than Bell for truely *local* calls. But why is AT&T just' getting around to sending out fliers when we've been able to do 10-XXX for inTRA-LATA since 1991?!? Also, while Bell did prohibit 10-XXX for inTRA-LATA prior to Fall 1991, there was *one* exception. Mercury Long Distance (not associated with the UK's Mercury) at 10-221 (I think) *could* be used within only the Lafayette LA LATA for inTRA LATA. Mercury was associated with an independent local telco in the Lafayette LA LATA. Maybe that independent had some pull with the PSC to have their access allowed. And, ever since 1991, Louisiana has had LOS'- Local Option Service. This is a series of *optional* plans you can pay for which allows you 7-digit access to inTRA-LATA points *outside* of the traditional local calling area. It does *not* cover an entire LATA, however. There are rather large discounts when compared to standard' Bell toll rates to those points. The first (inner) ring around the traditional local calling area has a maximum cap on the total charges. The outer ring allows you discounts over traditional toll rates, but there is no maximum cap. You do pay for call usage, although there is a different fixed charge than traditional monthly flat rate local service. All per-minute rates- whether capped or uncapped seem to be noticeably less than most IXC's, even using an IXC's calling plan (such as AT&T's True Savings). As an LOS subscriber, I *can* place a 10-XXX call to these LOS points (even the `capped' inner LOS points) by dialing 10-XXX+seven digits, but it *is* cheaper to call those LOS points as regular Bell 7-digit dialing if you went out of the way to buy' a Bell LOS plan. Here in Louisiana, we don't yet have dialing parity (PIC) for IXC inTRA-LATA calls. I don't know how this will eventually affect LOS customers. But, other carriers (MCI in particular) have promoted other means of access for InTRA-LATA. MCI in *many* parts of the US uses *its* numbering space in special areacode 700 for inTRA-LATA service via them. MCI PIC'd customers can replace their Home NPA with 700, by dialing 1-700+the inTRA-LATA number. My PIC is AT&T, but I *am* able to place inTRA-LATA calls via MCI (within NPA 504) as 10-222/101-0222+ 1/0+700+. But remember, LATA boundaries and NPA boundaries (and state borders) do *not* necessarily coincide. There can be all-or-part' of one-or-more' LATA's within a particular NPA, just like there can be all-or-part' of one-or-more' NPA's inside of a particular LATA. The numbering format and LATA boundaries here in Louisiana are *not* all that complicated. I don't know how larger more populated areas can properly use MCI's 700 for inTRA-LATA. The town of Crossroads MS is 601-772, but it is in the New Orleans LATA. Also, 772 seems' to be a protected c/o code in 504. Crossroads MS and Bogalusa LA are local to each other. I think that they still can 7-digit dial to each other without needing to 1+NPA. Even before Fall 1991, I could use a 10-XXX code to call Crossroads MS via an IXC. (10-XXX+1/0+601-772-XXXX). If I did simply 1/0+601-772-XXXX I would rather go thru Bell. I think that the 10-XXX access via an IXC was permitted because it was inTER-STATE. I don't know if I were to dial (via MCI): (10-222/101-0222)+1/0+700-772-XXXX if I could be able to connect to a Crossroads MS number, however. BUT I *did* discover that (10-222/101-0222)+1/0+700+ *can* be used for *any* location in 504. It works on the LOS points (I *do* subscribe to LOS), as well as *local* (I dialed my own local number this way, and my cellphone started ringing, since I was off-hook busy' on my local number, and I have forward on busy/no-answer to my cellphone). I even tried 10-222+1+700+ a Baton Rouge LATA number (also in 504) and the call went thru! But *I* find the use of 700 for InTRA-LATA to be a waste' of an IXC's *own* 700 numbering space. These calls *could* also be dialed as 10-XXX+ inTRA-LATA, and the IXC could use the 700 space for other carrier-specific purposes. *I* only wish that *every* (traditional) LEC had a (preferably uniform/universal) 10-XXX/101-XXXX code, as well as 950-XXXX and 1-800- number for placing inTRA-LATA calls. I do NOT like it when COCOTS refuse me access to Bell services on 0+ (or 0- opeartor) when I *want* to use the LEC for *local* local calls. That way, I wouldn't have to bother with an AOS wanting to bill me a dollar or two a minute for *local* card calls! MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Some More Notes on CID Date: Sun, 19 Nov 95 23:07:00 CST I was unaware that CID-with-Name could transmit both uppercase and lowercase alpha characters. I haven't yet purchased Bellcore specs on CID-with-Name; other than some recent specs on ADSI/CID-on-CW, all I have from Bellcore is some 1987 specs on number-only CID. As for CID-on-CW, I've had some local Bell service reps tell me that it *is* available (probably on a test/trial-market basis) in *some* BellSouth areas, but not yet anywhere in Louisiana. I hope it will come soon, and I hope that the CID-on-CW/ADSI box I eventually get can support lowercase alpha characters as well. As for block-the-blocker' or Anonymous Call Rejection, the *77 (11-77) turn-on and *87 (11-87) turn-off still don't yet work from my #1AESS switch, but the BellSouth service rep told me that it will be available soon, at *no* additional cost. They state that it is to be an enhancement' to my CID service. Recently, I had a chance to experiment with a Centrex (city-wide centrex). Please note- NOT a PBX, but a Centrex. For those who don't know, Centrex is usually the term for PBX features or line-group features, as well as `abbreviated internal line number dialing', but all is controlled by telco's central office rather than a CPE switch. And all lines on a Centrex have loops to the telco (neighborhood) c/o switch rather than concentration & trunks. A call from a Centrex line will give dialtone from the telco switch, and connect right away rather than the PBX having to dial-out'. And the number will show up on other CID boxes as the actual directory numbers rather than a PBX trunk line. Dialing in to a Centrex is just as fast as any other telco trunks. Calls going into a PBX takes some time, since telco sends the dialed number TO the PBX and then the PBX connects the call. I tried to do *67 and the like from the Centrex. When I did *-6 (or 11-6) I was cut off *right-away* to ringing. I don't know if this was a Centrex internal number/service-code or not -- I hung up before anything answered (even tho' it might have been an `invalid-code' recording). When I dialed 9 (for outside calls) plus *67 (11-67) I got cut off to re-order. The same happened (after dialing 9) with *82 (11-82), *77 (11-77), *70 (11-70), *71 (11-71) {BTW, the centrex lines did have 3-way on the line already}, *87 (11-87) and probably a few others. Unassigned (or at least those not planned for use in New Orleans) *XX (11-XX) codes gave me ringing and a recording, "...cannot be completed as dialed. Please check your instruction manual or call the Business Office for assistance" which I would also get on NON-Centrex lines. Dialing some *-X codes BEFORE the `9' would sometimes get a recording about calling the *attendant* for assistance, while `0' without a 9 would get me a recording that office hours are only on weekdays (this happened to be a Saturday). 9-0 would give me Bell's operators. Dialing four digits (NXXX) would get me some other station on the city-wide centrex system, and there had to be some numbering constraints for other Central Offices in the city to have a seamless' city-wide four-digit dialing on this system. I was able to dial regular switch based ANAC and ringback (for that particular geographic telco switch) after dialing 9. Many PBX systems, however don't allow access to telco ANAC or ringback. But I wonder if 9-*67 will eventually work, as *I* think it would, even from these Centrex systems. This is *telco* switching from regular c/o switches, and not a CPE PBX system. As for CID-on-CW and other ADSI features, these new boxes (box-only) will have to have two SPECIFIED modular jacks. One is for the line, and the other can cut-off' what is plugged into it- this second one for the phone. Actual phones with *built-in* CID-on-CW/ADSI features have their handset completely muted (or switched out) of the line, so data going back and forth (1200 Baud FSK from the switch, and DTMF tones A B C D from the CPE) won't be corrupted by conversation or background noise, nor annoy' the user. It only takes about a second for the data to transmit back and forth, so there really isn't a loss of conversation- only a slight dropout. If phones with the displays built-in mute/switch-out the handset, then `stand-alone' boxes will have to have a controlled jack for a `standard' phone. I hope that Nortel (and other manufacturers) will eventually contain a little speaker in the CID-on-CW/ADSI boxes. If one has to put the handset aside' to answer the doorbell, change channels or VCR settings, turn off the stove, etc. and one has CW, one doesn't know if a call beeps in, unless one is in a non-digital type of office (#1AESS, etc.), since the other party will hear that distinct click-click' if they are still listening on their end. But in a digital office, there is *no* click-click- just a slight drop out of conversation if the beeped party is talking at the moment they are beeped. A little speaker in a CID-on-CW box could also beep when a CW signal is received! And the person with the handset-put-aside would know that they have a incomming beeping call, and would also know to look at their box, rather than be unaware of an incomming call. There are always new services and features, and I would hope that Bellcore, Nortel, and the LEC's would work out improved inter-compata- bility standards when multiple features are ordered for a line. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: ritbrown@aol.com (R IT Brown) Subject: Re: AT&T Fires Its First Shot? Date: 17 Nov 1995 15:27:53 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: ritbrown@aol.com (R IT Brown) All AT&T is trying to do is grab the long distance traffic within the LATA boundaries. Today this piece has not been designated as equal access so that is why you must dial the 10288 first. Soon the switches will be upgraded to allow for two carriers per subscriber ... one for intralata and one for interlata. You may wish to consider telling your mom to use it for long distance calls within the state since she will likely pay less than using the Bell System. If you want more info e-mail me at RITBROWN@AOL.COM. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Um, am I missing something here? AT&T *is* the Bell System, or what is left of it anyway. Or did you mean to say it another way? PAT] ------------------------------ From: sam@nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? Date: 18 Nov 95 14:18:13 GMT In tclbbs@parka.winternet.com (Brian Elfert) writes: > A short article on this very subject was in today's > newspaper. In 1991, the accident report form that all police > departments in the state use was amended to include use of > cellular phone as a contribuating factor in an accident. > A cellular phone was a contributing factor in only .1% of > accidents since 1991. We've just had an investigation looking into these matters here in Sweden. Conclusion number one was that people that are using *hands-free* equipment drive slower and better. I guess talking to mum keeps you calm :-). But, conclusion number two was even more interesting. Using the car stereo is far more dangerous than using even hand portable telephones since dialing a number usually takes less time than finding your favourite FM-station. Sam http://www.nada.kth.se/~sam, sam@nada.kth.se, +46 701234567 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 10:03:28 EST From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: Cellphones Cause Accidents? Organization: Penn State University A couple of years ago, I gave new meaning to the word "roaming" when I roamed my minivan into the fence of my driveway (right turn) while talking on a cell phone (at night). Oops. Pete Weiss ------------------------------ From: zakharia@WPI.EDU (Sany M. Zakharia) Subject: Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming Date: Mon, 20 Nov 95 02:53:39 GMT Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute In article , Scott Drown wrote: > I asked the Cell-One person why they didn't tell me beforehand that they > were going to do this. He assured me that a notice would be in my next > billing statement, and all I have to do is call and ask for roaming to > be turned on. That is odd. I was informed in my last month's bill that I hadn't roamed in the past six months and that my roaming privelages had been suspended. I would have thought the notice was circulated to all suscribers. Sany ------------------------------ From: KMP@portal.vpharm.com (K. M. Peterson) Subject: Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming Date: 19 Nov 1995 17:19:43 GMT Organization: Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated In article Scott Drown writes: > If you are a Cell-One/Boston customer, and you might want to roam, you > might want to call and have them turn roaming back on. I'd received a notice in my invoice about this two months ago ... they were hapy to turn it on for me again when I travelled. K. M. Peterson ------------------------------ From: jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com (Jeffrey Rhodes) Subject: Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? Date: 19 Nov 1995 17:33:26 GMT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. Reply-To: jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com In article 1@massis.lcs.mit.edu, bapat@gate.net (S. Bapat) writes: > In article , aresnik@execpc.com wrote: >> I heard that Sprint has filed with the FCC to ignore *67 per call >> blocking on interstate long distance ... that would appear to be a >> direct violation of the FCC rules. Anybody know the details? This is ludicrous. Much more likely Sprint has filed to convert Equal Access calls to unrestricted CallerID when the Equal Access call does not provide a restricted or unrestricted CallerID as described below. Equal Access calls always supply information concerning the ANI, regardless of whether out-of- band common channel ISUP signaling or in-band MF Feature Group D signaling is used to deliver the call to Sprint. > According to the filing, if the software encounters a blank callerID > field, it assumes that it must be because the originating LEC is some > small hick rural telco that cannot supply callerID. So, it grabs the > ANI, substitutes it for the callerID, and delivers it in-band to the > called party as regular callerID. The "blank callerID field" is the Calling Party Number (CPN) in the ISUP message that Sprint receives. It is possible to suppress the CPN, in which case a Charging Number (CHN) field (which is the ANI) is included. Apparently Sprint converts CHN to unrestricted CPN. When the ANI and calling number are the same (they aren't the same when a call is made behind most PBXes) then only the CPN is delivered and the CHN is blank. When someone dials *67 the CPN is not blank! The Calling Party Number is delivered WITH RESTRICTION BITS SET all the way to the final destination switch. The line on the final destination switch will not "see" the CallerID because the RESTRICTION BITS ARE SET. Instead, the line will "see" PRIVATE. In the case where no CPN is delivered, the line will "see" OUT OF AREA. Just in case this isn't clear, when someone dials *67 prefix, their number is sent by the network from local loop carrier to long distance carrier back to another local loop carrier (or at least that's what the FCC has mandated for December 1, 1995). The *67 causes the number to be restricted so that PRIVATE is displayed and not the caller's number. Similarly, *82 prefix can be used to make sure that the number is unrestricted and is able to be displayed. Jeffrey Rhodes at jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com ------------------------------ From: clifto@indep1.chi.il.us (Clifton T. Sharp) Subject: Re: Sprint to Ignore *67? Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 04:20:19 GMT In article bapat@gate.net (S. Bapat) writes: > Apparently Sprint has filed with the FCC for an exemption from > respecting *67. The ostensible reason is the new software Sprint has > in its switches is smarter than it ought to be. Doesn't sound like it to me ... > According to the filing, if the software encounters a blank callerID > field, it assumes that it must be because the originating LEC is some > small hick rural telco that cannot supply callerID. So, it grabs the > ANI, substitutes it for the callerID, and delivers it in-band to the > called party as regular callerID. Wait a minute here. Their machines can't tell the difference between a data stream containing a date+time header with an accompanying flag indicating 'private', and NO DATA STREAM AT ALL? And they can't tell customers to dial 10222 *67 xxx-xxx-xxxx? What am I missing here, and why does it seem like everyone else bought this? Cliff Sharp WA9PDM clifto@indep1.chi.il.us ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #489 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 20 03:53:35 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id DAA10677; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 03:53:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 03:53:35 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511200853.DAA10677@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #490 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Nov 95 03:53:30 EST Volume 15 : Issue 490 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (aat@vax2.sagres.com.au) Re: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (Sam Spens Clason) Re: Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) (George Goble) Re: Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) (Ed Ellers) Re: Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) (James Bellaire) Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? (Floyd Davidson) Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? (Greg Tompkins) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Tim Shoppa) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Jim Borynec) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aat@vax2.sagres.com.au Subject: RE: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (was Re: Bell Atlantic) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 95 16:01:28 +900 Organization: SAGASCO Resources Ltd. In Article Doucet@SARA.NL (Jeroen Doucet) writes: > But what happens if you call me from Italy on my Dutch GSM while I am in > Greece? The CALLER pays for a call Italy -> Holland. The ANSWERER pays for a call Holland -> Greece > And if I am in France and use my Dutch GSM to call my French > neighbour on his French GSM? The Caller pays for a local France GSM call, plus a Dutch billing surcharge of about 30%. However, if your French neighbour places a call using his French GSM from France to your Dutch GSM while you are in France, he pays for a call France -> Holland and you pay for a call Holland -> France. > Nobody knows. Now they do -- but it sure is a puzzle ... and there's plenty of room for carriers to keep their international links unnecessarily busy (and earning revenue!). Perhaps the next GSM development will be intelligent enough to figure out the location of both caller and called phones and not use, or charge for, international links unless they are absolutely necessary. But who's going to pay to have such a system developed? Let's see if truly competitive markets really do work in the long run! ------------------------------ From: sam@nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: European Caller-Pays Cellular Service (was Re: Bell Atlantic) Date: 19 Nov 95 14:05:11 GMT In Juha Veijalainen writes: > Jeroen Doucet wrote: >> franz@inf.ethz.ch (Michael Franz) wrote: >>> As far as I know, all European GSM networks are caller-pays. I think I'd stretch that as far as *all* mobile networks in Europe. Objections anyone? >> But what happens if you call me from Italy on my Dutch GSM >> while I am in Greece? And if I am in France and use my >> Dutch GSM to call my French neighbour on his French GSM? >> Nobody knows. > 1. Caller pays international charge from Italy to Holland. > Dutch GSM owner pays a fixed per minute charge for receiving > the call in Greece. > 2. If you use your Dutch GSM in France to call a French GSM > phone, your Dutch phone will be charged the local GSM tariff > for that call. > Also, there is a 5 % surcharge if you make outgoing calls > when roaming. > This is how I'm charged, as far as I know (my home network is > Telecom Finland). Charges for receiving calls depend on > where you are roaming. The basic rule is the longer the > distance from your home country, the more you pay. There is also the nightmare scenario of: Finnish subscriber Roaming in France Called from France Divert calls to voice-mail on no reach. Not reachable The caller pays French international (to Finland) rate. Callee pays from Finland to France AND France to voice-mail (in Finland) + surcharge. This applies to all call diversions (not answered, busy, not reachable etc) except unconditional forwarding (*21*). I have heard that the GSM MoU is working on specs how this is to be avoided (SS7...). Status anyone? Sam http://www.nada.kth.se/~sam, sam@nada.kth.se, +46 701234567 ------------------------------ From: ghg@cidmac.ecn.purdue.edu (George Goble) Subject: Re: Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) Date: 19 Nov 1995 17:36:52 GMT Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network In Telecom Digest V15 #485 Pat noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was *no* Chicago central office > fire in 1975. The big fire in Chicago was in May, 1988. Perhaps you > are thinking of the big central office fire in Manhattan, New York. > That would have been about 1975 or so. Another telco fire which has > been largely forgotten was in the early 1960's at Richmond, Indiana I grew up near Richmond when this fire happened. It was GTE at that time. NNX's I remember were 935 957 962 966 973. 962 and 966 were for downtown, rest were for country and outskirts, etc. All were in the same building though. Fire was on a Sunday morning, and it was not very big nor did it last long. However, the burning rubber insulation smoke ruined all the contacts (all mechanical) of everything it touched. I think 935 and part of 957 kept running after the fire, the rest were down for something like one or two years. This was about the time DDD was coming to town. I was in Greensfork (four digit numbers), and moved to Centerville about that time, went to seven digit, 855 NNX, right next to Richmond. There was a *HUGE* effort of police patrols, to radio in emergencies, and in two weeks a "plugboard" system started to be setup. The local paper, the Palladium-Item, published a temp "phonebook" as everybody had "new" numbers, all five or six digits, and starting with "99-...." and had lots of leading 9's I remember. You got a plugboard operator whom connected your (local) call for almost two years I remember. I remember pictures of semi truck flatbed trailers delivering the plugboards (the length of the semi trailer!). Eventually, when the automatic equipment was replaced, everybody ended up with their old numbers. A couple of years later, HALON was invented and was hailed in preventing this kind of disaster (nothing was known about the ozone hole then) Before the fire, a call originated in Centerville or Richmond to the local area would not terminate until the caller hung up. One could take down a radio show talk line, by not hanging up I remember. There was nothing the called party could do to break the connection, short of calling the phone company. ghg [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you *certain* it was GTE at the time of the fire? My memory is that a larger telco (I originally said Indiana Bell, but apparently it was GTE) bought it from the family which owned it *the day of the fire*. I do remember the Sunday morning and I am almost certain it was Easter Sunday. I do know it was an independent company at some point prior to the fire but the details just are not clear in my mind. I also remember that Indiana Bell guys came over from Indianapolis to help in the emergency restoration of service. Maybe I thought it was manual at the time of the fire because as you point out it *was* manual afterward during the restoration. Somewhere around here I have some interesting historical notes dating back to December, 1941 and the telephone exchange building at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on the day of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. A woman who was the chief operator there at the time (it was all manual, serving Hickam Base and the local civilian community) made some extensive notes which I printed here at one time. She said during the three or four hour period the air raid was going on (again, a Sunday morning) the bombs were falling all around them, some as close as a hundred yards away, but none fell on the phone exchange itself. The damage to the outside plant was very severe however, with about fifty percent of their subscribers knocked out due to downed wires, fires burning out of control, etc. She noted, 'the Pearl City Fire Department stayed busy that day and so did we ...'. Later in the day after the attack was finished, she noted that 'some men from the phone repair service in Honolulu came over and spent several hours surveying the damage. They sent a dozen crews to begin repairs the next morning, but it was several days before things got back to normal with the phones, however in actuality, things never did get back to normal, since a whole new era started that day that FDR said would 'live in infamy forever'. Word of the attack started spreading all over the mainland (where it was about 1:00 PM that Sunday afternoon) and in her notes she mentined that 'within less than an hour after it started I was putting through a call to the States and when San Fran- sisco answered me the first thing she said was "what the hell is going on over there?" Indeed, we were not sure yet either; we were the last ones they told anything to. Not only did San Fransisco (at the time the termination point for AT&T's Pacific cable between Hawaii and the mainland) keep pumping me for details, but the RCA cable kept chattering at us (the telex to the mainland) with the radio networks in New York wanting to know the same thing.' PAT] ------------------------------ From: edellers@shivasys.com (Ed Ellers) Subject: Re: Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) Date: 20 Nov 1995 04:20:59 GMT Organization: Pennsylvania Online! [Usenet News Server for hire] In article , bellaire@tk.com says: > Now if they would only upgrade their switches in the little towns east of > Fort Wayne and around LaPorte. You can still place a local call within > your CO by dialing the last five digits, forcing out of CO local calls to > use a 44+ or 3+ prefix. > Come on GTE, this is 1995!! LaPorte had the world's first dial switch, way back before the turn of the century -- it would be sacrilege to upgrade that one! :-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 01:17:21 -0500 From: James E. Bellaire Subject: Re: Richmond, Indiana Phones (was Re: Los Angeles Dial) In TD V15 #488 I wrote: > Other GTE Notes: > GTE is still slowly spreading across Indiana, purchasing COs from smaller > nationals and independents. They are still changing signs south of > Fort Wayne where they bought out AllTel a couple years ago. In the far > south of Indiana (just as in Central Illinois) GTE does business as Contel. To which Pat replied: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You make it sound like a disease or a > fungus when you phrase it that way: 'they are spreading slowly > across northern Indiana' ... okay so I was wrong on Indiana Bell > taking over Richmond, but you missed the point. Do you recall the > fire in Richmond and the little independent that had the exchange > there before it burned down? I still am pretty certain however > that emergency restoral was done by Bell; I almost distinctly > recall hearing that Bell sent in crews that Sunday morning from > Indianapolis to set up temporary facilities. More details, any > old-timers? Also James, which telco has Westville, Indiana? PAT] No viral spread intended, although on my maps of the Indiana LATA's I have colored in the CO servers and it does look like a liver spots sometimes. :) I'm afraid my years in Indiana don't go back too far (I moved here in 1992), so the older-timers will have to help. Maybe Bell charged so much that the independent had to sell out to General Telephone? In LaPorte County Indiana I have Westville, Hanna, Rolling Prairie, Union Mills and LaPorte down in my listings as being served by GTE (with all calls between being local). Long Distance to the North is Michigan City served by Ameritech. Porter County to the West is almost entirely GTE. (Based on the LaPorte, Valparaiso, and Michigan City Phone Books.) James E. Bellaire (JEB6) Twin Kings Communications bellaire@tk.com ------------------------------ From: floyd@bravo.imagi.net (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: Is ISDN Really Always Digital? Date: 20 Nov 1995 02:33:49 GMT Reply-To: floyd@bravo.imagi.net In article , Philip Treuer wrote: > I believe the answer to the question you've posed is "no" (Can a telco > guarantee whether any particular call on an ISDN line will be digital?) The IXC can guarantee that an ISDN data call will in fact be digital, and indeed if it is not the call cannot be completed. A voice call might not (and need not) be all digital. > In my state, Alaska, the two major interexchange carriers, AT&T Alascom Before proceeding, let me point out that I am an AT&T Alascom employee. I am not paid to speak for the company, and I don't. It should also be understood that AT&T purchased Alascom from Pacific Telecom Inc. only this fall. The historical faults of Alascom do not reflect on AT&T, but on Pacific Corp, the owner of PTI. > and GCI, have indicated that they won't even carry a switched 56 or 64K ISDN > call unless they can charge extra for the call -- which will require data > users to dial special access numbers on interexchange calls. The only > exception to this so far is that switched 56 calls to the lower 48 from > Anchorage (the only community so far that has switched 56 service; ISDN is > not available any where in the state) are transported intact and at no extra > charge. AT&T Alascom (and I believe GCI also) has offered ISDN and SW56 service for a number of years to all major locations in the state. I know of no requirement for special dialing. The difficulty is that neither IXC can offer service to a customer without a leased line interconnect through a local LEC, which is relatively expensive. I'm not sure if ATU in Anchorage is now offering ISDN or SW56, but the last that I knew not one single LEC in the state offered either, and such service could only be purchased through the IXC's at the mentioned rather expensive rates. The State of Alaska and the federal government (through FTS-2000) both use SW56 and ISDN to some degree. I really can't comment in any depth on how much difficulty GCI might be enountering with ISDN calls switched through their network. Compression, for example, might be a significant problem for them. I can comment that AT&T Alascom does not have any such problem ... ;-) > Furthermore, these IXCs will only guarantee data transmission over > their (intrastate) digital networks of 9.6 kbps for modem and fax > users. In other words, there's no point getting a modem or fax faster > than 9.6 kbps in Alaska if you plan to use it primarily for interexchange > calls. This is because the IXCs compress multiple voice calls onto a > single channel. The compression technique doesn't work as well for > data calls. Anything faster than 9.6 will bite the dust (and in rural > areas the problem is even worse). I've been told that there is > special detection equipment that could be used to isolate the higher > speed data traffic of modem and fax users; however GCI has asserted > that installation of this equipment would increase its capital cost by > 10%. The above is true of GCI's infrastructure, but it is not true for AT&T Alascom. (However that doesn't mean all is rosey with AT&T Alascom either...) AT&T Alascom's network will handle high speed modems to over 90% (I've seen the figure, but can't remember it exactly ... 93% sounds right.) of the subscribers in Alaska, and of course to interstate locations too. I personally have and use a 28.8 modem for mostly interechange calls ... (and I live in a rural location, too.) However, since most of my extended family lives in bush areas of the state, and are amongst the 5% or so who do not have modern digital service, my sympathies are perhaps weighted toward being annoyed at the poor service to small bush areas. > In your example, you speculate about analog switches as the potential > culprits. I believe that analog transmission or other non-fiber > transmission facilities could also be potential drags on through-put, That is very true. There are no analog switches of any kind still operating in Alaska. But there are some analog transmission facilities still in use. In addition to the many analog small earth stations in bush Alaska, the entire George Parks Highway north of Talkeetna to Fairbanks is served by an old analog microwave system! > particularly in rural areas. In Alaska all local and interexchange switches > are digital, however significant portions of the interexchange network are > still analog. AT&T Alascom, which is the only IXC permitted to operate > interexchange facilities statewide, There are, I believe, four IXC's permitted to operate statewide. GCI and AT&T Alascom are the only two that currently operate switching systems, but United Utilities Inc. operates a significant amount of the bush transmission infrastructure. > still uses analog transmission to about 200 of the approximately 250 > locations statewide. There is plenty of demand for switched 56 and > ISDN in rural areas, but it makes little sense for LECs to offer these > services locally if the interexchange network won't support it. I'm not sure what the precise numbers are, but the above gives a false impression. A true impression is _not_ good, just different! There are no "major" locations in Alaska served by analog transmission systems. That means there are few if any population centers with more than 800 or so people that are not digital. In the "rural" (quoted because that includes what we in Alaska would call bush and what we would call rural; two distinct entities to us) locations where digital facilities are available not one LEC offers ISDN. That would include such bush locations as Nome, Barrow, Dillingham, Bethel, and Kotzebue. AT&T Alascom has operating SW56 services to FTS-2000 customers in all of those locations. The lack of ISDN service is not primarily the fault of the IXC's, but lies with the LECs. My personal complaint is that Alascom under PTI refused to push the LECs by making neither competative moves to bypass them, nor any other attempt to force the issue. That was an explicit management decision, not an accident. Also it is worth noting that a plan put forward in about 1990, and delayed at every step, would have essentially digitalized transmission facilties to every location within the state by 1995. Many bush locations, and specifically those with larger populations such as the list above, and those locations with the oldest analog satellite earth station equipment have been converted to digital; but for many other bush customers the complaint about poor data connections is very true. In particular the difficulties with double satellite hops for calls between nearby villages is very annoying to school systems! As bush teachers read about and attempt to implement technology that will connect students with the "information highway" they discover that calls placed over 20 year old analog systems are subject to cutoffs, dropouts, and low speed at best connections. > requirements increase. My previous question that went unanswered sought > information about whether the major IXCs also use compression on their fiber > systems. It may be that they don't. However, will fiber bandwidth always > be so inexpensive that the IXCs don't have to consider the efficiency > associated with compressing voice calls. The only domestic market with a limited fiber bandwidth is Alaska. However, under "normal" circumstances AT&T Alascom does not compress traffic on the North Pacific Fiber cable. GCI however does, and because of that Alascom some time back filed a tariff to provide identical service to GCI, and an identical rate (cheaper than non-compressed service) in order to compete with GCI's lower priced offering! It was a basic response to customer demands. (That is also a leased line service, and has no effect on switched message traffic through AT&T Alascom facilities.) > I've been told that its possible to transport a voice call with less > than 10 kbps. Given that the standard uncompressed digital voice > circuit is 64 kbps it seems that there's a lot of room for efficiency. > If and when the IXCs decide to compress 3, 4 and 5 voice calls onto a > single 64 kbps channel, will they still be willing to carry switched > 56 and ISDN at no extra charge? In Alaska the answer has been "no." As an example of what you are up against, note that the Fairbanks Municipal Utilities System not only refuses to offer digital services, they also refuse to connect to the SS7 network and offer no CLASS services at all! Imagine where ISDN is on their priority list ... Floyd AT&T Alascom Fairbanks Toll Center Floyd L. Davidson Salcha, Alaska floyd@imagi.net ------------------------------ From: Greg Tompkins Subject: Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 20:26:41 -0800 Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 Corey Hauer wrote: > Foreign Exchange service years ago was tariffed, therefore using it > to avoid toll charges was not illegal. That is if you do not live in the state of Oregon. Our telecom laws are so messed up, it's just rediculous. I have tried many times to get a foreign exchange line and they are just not allowed - PERIOD. My next strategy is to get an ISDN line installed from a foreign switch and have analog ports to get around long distance charges. Since my local switch doesn't have the capability they would put me on an Individual Case Basis - I will have to give up the line whenever my local Central Office gets ISDN service. I may just get a 56K line installed to a friend's house in the area I want to be able to have a foreign exchange line, put a voice over data multiplexer and be set! Is this method illegal? I know several companies, like RAD and BlackBox advertise products that do just this. e-mail: gregt@teleport.com Greg Tompkins bandwidth@transport.com Dayton, OREGON gregt@4tacres.com gtompkins@foxmail.gfc.edu ------------------------------ From: shoppa@altair.krl.caltech.edu (Tim Shoppa) Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Date: 20 Nov 1995 06:17:41 GMT Organization: Kellogg Radiation Lab, Caltech In article , Bill McMullin wrote: > Wouldn't it be great to solve the problems of the digital poor? I > agree with our Canadian friend who questions the high cost of memory. > How could anything produced in such mass quantity cost so much? Sorry, I have to disagree here. Memory is *dirt cheap* these days. Anyone who says otherwise wasn't buying memory two decades ago; my first 4kbytes of RAM cost me $200 back then. $200 will buy you 6 megabytes now, easily. To get online doesn't require much memory, anyway. I'm writing this on a DEC VT100 terminal; it has less than 4 kbytes of RAM in it. Anyone who wants to get online can buy a cheap terminal (or a used PC with less than a megabyte and a mono monitor) and a high speed modem for about $100 these days. Never has this sort of technology been so cheap and readily available! > If they are trying to make use believe it is a commodity subject to > supply and demand, why isn't it traded on the stock market? (Maybe it > is, help me here.) It *is* based on supply and demand. The demand is just so incredibly high, and getting higher all the time. > I would like a critique of this please ... > Why don't we mobilize an effort to create the Community RAM Company. > Collectively, all the people on the Net (or a significant percentage of > them) could do one of two things: > 1) lobby the RAM manufacturers for more reasonable pricing (a big > buying group). What are we going to do, launch a boycott? If we don't buy the memory, somebody else will. > 2) initiate a business effort to create a company, financed by the Internet > community, and possibly other members, to manufacturer RAM, either by > buying a RAM manufacturer or creating one. Got a billion dollars or more? That's how much some of the new memory factories cost these days. Every major manufacturer is building new plants, as a matter of fact. Tim (shoppa@altair.krl.caltech.edu) ------------------------------ From: jborynec@agt.net (Jim Borynec) Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Date: Sun, 20 Nov 1995 15:14:24 GMT Organization: AGT Ltd. bill@interactive.ns.ca (Bill McMullin) wrote: > Why don't we mobilize an effort to create the Community RAM Company. > Collectively, all the people on the Net (or a significant percentage of > them) could do one of two things: > 1) lobby the RAM manufacturers for more reasonable pricing (a big > buying group). I suspect that pure lobbying efforts will not come to much. The large clone companies don't seem to get much discount. A more useful use of the net would be to investigate RAM prices and RAM discounts. Most "cozy" deals fall apart upon exposure to sunlight. > 2) initiate a business effort to create a company, financed by the Internet > community, and possibly other members, to manufacturer RAM, either by > buying a RAM manufacturer or creating one. I would be willing to invest in such an effort, if it was headed by competent individuals. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Personally I think we will > see complete desk top computer systems in the price range of $100- > $200 within a year or two. I disagree. The normal price of a desktop computer is somewhere between $1000 and $2000. If component prices fall, more components will be added until the price threshold is met. The reason for this dynamic is the same reason that cheap housing never seems to be built: There is not enough money in it. j.b. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #490 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 21 09:54:04 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA13918; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:54:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:54:04 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511211454.JAA13918@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #491 TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Nov 95 09:54:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 491 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada Agrees to Work With ISPs to Resolve Centrex Dispute (J Nemanic) Victory for Canadian ISPs (Chris Gettings) 3rd ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (R.F. Graveman) What is EXCEL,a Real LD Company, or MLM Scam? (Scott D. Green) Weird Stuff Using Callback (Eric Friedebach) 1-800-MY-ANI-IS Now Requires Passcode (Scott Gordon) Notice re FCC Toll-Free NPRM Responses (Judith Oppenheimer) Question About 12 KHz and 16 KHz Payphone Signals (Masoud Loghmani) BellSouth's Caller ID Deluxe (Michael Klein) Woman in New York Gets $25K Phone Bill From Nynex by Mistake (Robt. Casey) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wolfmstr@idirect.com (John A. Nemanic) Subject: Bell Canada Agrees to Work With ISPs to Resolve Centrex Dispute Organization: Internet Direct, Canada Date: 21 Nov 95 03:01:15 GMT Monday November 20th/1995 6:11pm To the Internet Community: This evening, Bell Canada faxed the following letter to Internet Direct Canada Inc.: ---------------------- Bell Canada Letterhead From: D.H.(Don) Morrison Group Vice President Local Marketing and Sales 1995 11 20 Mr. John Epstein Passport Online Mr. John A. Nemanic President Internet Direct Canada Inc. Mr. Lorien Gabel Vice-President Interlog Dear John, John and Lorien: I promised that I would get back to you today. I apologize that it is late in the day. but nonetheless I want to thank you again for the meeting on Friday. I want to let you know that we will work with the CRTC to help them understand that Bell Canada does not consider the existing Centrex tariff nor the ISAL tariff to apply to the ISP application. Secondly. that Bell Canada proposes to continue applying Centrex III rates for new and existing services until a new alternative is developed. To that end we would sincerely appreciate your help if you could join us to work on the development of new alternatives to be filed with the CRTC by November 30th. We will be in touch to schedule a time convenient for you. Once again, thank you for your co-operation. Yours sincerely, D.H.(Don) Morrison Group Vice President Local Marketing and Sales Bell Canada Floor 10, South Tower 483 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M5C 2E1 ----------------------------- This letter is the outcome of a meeting held Friday November 17th, 1995 between Bell Canada, with Mr. Morrison in attendance, and representatives of RISC, Responsible Internet Service Companies, a not-for-profit Internet Service Provider (ISP) association. Speaking for myself and not as a director of RISC, I am very pleased to learn that Bell Canada has responded to our concerns. In a nutshell, Bell Canada will work with ISPs to approach the CRTC and help them to understand that the ISAL tariff does not apply to the Internet Service Provision application. Application of this tariff would have meant a 300% increase in phone costs for ISPs, with consequent massive price increases for Internet access to consumers. For having the flexibility to re-examine their position, and the courage to do what is right, Mr. McLennan, Mr. Morrison, Mr. Halverson, Mr. Peck and Ms. Partland of Bell Canada, have earned our respect. I pledge my unconditional support to work with Bell Canada to devise a WIN-WIN-WIN solution for ISPs, Bell Canada and Consumers alike. Thank you Bell Canada, for listening to your customers. Sincerely, John A. Nemanic MBA, President, Internet Direct Canada Inc. Ontario's Leading Internet Service Provider and Internet Software Development Firm. Ph. (416) 233-7150 E-mail: wolfmstr@idirect.com Snail: 5415 Dundas St. West, Suite 301 Etobicoke, Ontario. M9B 1B5 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 95 19:35 EST From: gettings@econnect.ca (Chris Gettings) Subject: Victory for Canadian ISPs As previously posted, some enterprising ISPs mounted a furious battle opposing the proposed shift in rate plans for internet service providers in Ontario and Quebec. They have made some progress. Don Morrison, Vice President, Sales & Marketing, Bell Canada wrote to them: "I want to let you know that we will work with the CRTC to help them understand that Bell Canada does not consider the existing Centrex tariff nor the ISAL tariff to apply to the ISP application. Secondly, that Bell Canada proposes to continue applying Centrex III rates for new and existing services until a new alternative is developed." It appears that the providers, John Epstein-Passport Online, John Nemanic-Internet Direct and Lorien Gabel-Interlog, convinced Bell that the negative publicity surrounding the change in rates for the fledgling industry would far outweigh potential benefit from increased rates. Rates will stay the same (Centrex III) for the time being. The Bell response does allude to a "new alternative" which will certainly increase the cost of internet access lines, however the increase is not likely to be as drastic as would have occured under a switch to ISAL rates. John Epstein, is a particularly vocal supporter of the Canadian industry. You can reach him at: kludge@passport.ca. F.Y.I. Disclaimer: Passport is one of my internet providers. Christopher C. Gettings gettings@econnect.net www.econnect.net ------------------------------ From: rfg@latour..bellcore.com (R.F. Graveman) Subject: 3rd ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security Date: 20 Nov 1995 15:19:30 GMT Organization: Bellcore MRE 3rd ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security March 14-16, 1996 Hyatt Regency, New Delhi, India This message contains: - Technical Program - Registration Form - Committee information Technical Program ================== March 14 (9:00 - 5:00) ---------------------- Innaugral Practical System Issues, Richard Graveman (Bellcore, USA) - Unified Login with Pluggable Authentication Modules, Vipin Samar (Sun Microsystems, USA) - Secure External References in Multimedia Email Messages, Burkhard Wiegel (German National Research Center for IT, Germany) - Securing ATM Networks, Shaw-Cheng Chuang (University of Cambridge, UK) Break Key Management, Stuart Stubblebine (AT&T Bell Labs, USA) - Diffie-Hellman Key Distrubution Extended to Group Communication, Gene Tsudik (IBM Zurich Research Laboratory, Switzerland) - The Omega Key Management Service, Michael Reiter, Matthew Franklin, John Lacy, and Rebecca Wright (AT&T Bell Laboratories, USA) Lunch Digital Signatures, Tsutomu Matsumoto, (Yokohama Nat. U., Japan) - Proxy Signatures for Delegating Signing Operation, Masahiro Mambo, Keisuke Usuda, and Eiji Okamoto (JAIST, Japan) - Batch Exponentiation for Fast DLP-Based Signature Generation, David M'Raihi and David Naccache (GEMPLUS, France) Break Panel on Security in Developing Countries, Ravi Ganesan (Bell Atlantic, USA) - Authorization Model for HISTO, a Statistical Database System (Invited Paper), Aloke K. Kundu (Tata Consultancy Services, Calcutta, India) Aditya Bagchi (Indian Statistical Institute, Calcutta, India) - The Failure of Anti-Hacking Legislation: a Hong Kong Perspective (Invited Paper) Rynson Lau (Hong Kong Polytechnic University) Kwok-Yan Lam (National (University of Singapore) and Siu-Leung Chung (OLI, Hong Kong) - Panel Discusssion March 15 (9:30 - 5:00) ----------------------- Authentication and Electronic Commerce, Clifford Neuman (University of Southern California, USA) - Human-Computer Cryptography: An Attempt, Tsutomu Matsumoto (Yokohama National University, Japan) - Revokable and Versatile Electronic Money, Markus Jakobsson (University of California at San Diego, USA) and Moti Yung (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, USA) - An Efficient Fair Payment System, Jan Camenisch, Jean-Marc Piveteau, and Markus Stadler (ETH Zurich and Union Bank of Switzerland, Switzerland) Break Protocol Analysis, Paul Syverson (Naval Research Lab., USA) - An Authentication Logic Supporting Revocation and Recency, Stuart Stubblebine and Rebecca Wright (AT&T Bell Laboratories, USA) - An Approach to the Formal Verification Of Cryptographic Protocols, Dominique Bolignano (Bull S.A./OSS, France) Lunch Multilevel Systems- Aditya Bagchi (Indian Statistical Institute, India) - An Advanced Commit Protocol for MLS Distributed Database Systems, Indrajit Ray, Elisa Bertino, Sushil Jajodia and Luigi Mancini (University of Milan, Italy, and George Mason University, USA) - Several Secure Store and Forward Devices, David Goldschlag (Naval Research Laboratory, USA) Break Panel on Smart Cards- Jean-Jacques Quisquater (UCL-MathRiZK, Belgium) March 16 (9:30 - 12:30) ----------------------- Cryptanalysis, Bart Preneel, K.U. Leuven, Belgium - An Experiment on DES Statistical Cryptanalysis, Serge Vaudenay (ENS/DMI, France) - Breaking and Repairing a Convertible Undeniable Signature Scheme, Markus Michels (University of Technology Chemnitz-Zwickau, Germany) - Cryptanalysis of Private-Key Encryption Schemes Based on Burst-Error-Correcting Codes, Hung-Min Sun and Shiuh-Pyng Shieh (National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan) Break Access Control, Moti Yung, IBM - Access Control and Signatures via Quorum Secret Sharing, Moni Naor and Avishai Wool (The Weizmann Institute, Israel) - A Non-timestamped Authorization Model for Relational Databases, Elisa Bertino, Sushil Jajodia, and Pierangela Samarati (University of Milan, Italy, and George Mason University, USA) 12:30 Conference Adjourns ************************* Registration Form Register before March 1, 1996. On-site registration available only if space permits. Registration includes Continental Breakfast (March 14, 15, 16) and Lunch (March 14, 15). Hotel: Hyatt Regency, New Delhi, India, Phone: 91-11-6881234, Fax: 91-11-6886833. Please mention ACM Security Conference at time of reservation. Limited number of rooms blocked, so book early. Reservations can be made via any Hyatt Regency in USA (contact your travel agency). Name: Affliation: Address: Phone: Fax: E-Mail: Outside India: Registration Contact: Ms. Susan Quirk, Phone: 703-993-2090 Fax: 703-993-2112 Mail or Fax this form to: ACMCCS 96 Registration, Mailstop 3G3, Center for Professional Development Business Office, George Mason U Fairfax, VA 22030-4444 Payment of $150/-- can be made by check, money order, purchase order (US organization only) or credit card. Make checks or money orders payable, in US currency to GMU/ACMCCS96. Credit Card No.: Cardholder Name: Visa: ___ Mastercard ___ Expiratation: Signature: ----------------------------------------- In India: Registration Contacts Dr. Y.K. Sharma, National Informatics Centre Phone: 11-4361475 Fax: 11-4362489 Mr. H.C. Verma, AIMIL Pvt. Ltd. Phone: 11-6946281 Fax: 11-6945456 Mail this form to: ACMCCS 96 Registration, ACM Conference Secratariat, Training Division, National Informatics Center A-Block, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110 003 Payment of Rs. 4,500/-- can be made by draft to Third ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security payable at New Delhi. On site registration (Rs. 4,500/--) is available only if space permits. ************************** Sponsored by: ACM SIGSAC Hosted by: Bell Atlantic, National Informatics Centre AIMIL Private Limited George Mason University General Chairs: Ravi Ganesan, Bell Atlantic Ravi Sandhu, George Mason University Program Chairs: Li Gong, SRI International Jacques Stern, ENS-DMI Local Arrangement Chairs: N. Seshagiri, National Informatics Centre H.C. Verma, AIMIL Private Limited Awards Chair: Raymond Pyle, Bell Atlantic Publication Chair: Clifford Neuman, U. of Southern California Publicity Chair: Richard Graveman, Bellcore Program Committee Members: Aditya Bagchi, Indian Statistical Institute Elisa Bertino, University of Milan Matt Blaze, AT&T Bell Laboratories Claude Crepeau, Universite de Montreal Matthew Franklin, AT&T Bell Laboratories Virgil Gligor, University of Maryland Richard Graveman, Bellcore Sushil Jajodia, George Mason University Kwok-Yan Lam, Nat. Univ. of Singapore E. Stewart Lee, University of Toronto Arjen K. Lenstra, Bellcore Kaicheng Lu, Tsinghua University Shyh-Wei Luan, IBM Almaden Res. Center Tsutomu Matsumoto, Yokohama National U Catherine Meadows, Naval Research Labs. Clifford Neuman, U. of Southern California Luke O'Connor, DSTC Bart Preneel, K.U. Leuven Jean-Jacques Quisquater, UCL-MathRiZK Lakshmi Raman, Bellcore Michael Reiter, AT&T Bell Laboratories Nachum Shacham, SRI International Y.K. Sharma, National Informatics Center Shiuh-Pyng Shieh, Chiao-Tung University Stuart Stubblebine, AT&T Bell Laboratories Paul Syverson, Naval Research Laboratory Paul Van Oorschot, Bell-Northern Research Vijay Varadharajan, U. of Western Sydney Gio Wiederhold, Stanford University Michael Wiener, Bell-Northern Research Rebecca Wright, AT&T Bell Laboratories Moti Yung, IBM T.J. Watson Research Ctr. Steering Committee: Chair: Ravi Sandhu, George Mason U. Dorothy Denning, Georgetown University Ravi Ganesan, Bell Atlantic Raymond Pyle, Bell Atlantic ********************************************** Richard Graveman | V: +1 908 699-4611 | Bellcore 444 Hoes Lane, Rm. 1K-221 rfg@ctt.bellcore.com | F: +1 908 336-2943 | Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA ------------------------------ From: green@wharton.upenn.edu (Scott D. Green) Subject: What is EXCEL, a Real LD Company, or a MLM Scam? Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 11:45:40 LOCAL Organization: University of Pennsylvania I've got a friend who's involved with this company. She admits that it is most definitely a multi-level networking outfit, that is, one where the distributor profits somewhat from selling the product, but can really rake in the big bucks by signing on other distributors below you, like Amway. Anyway, among other claims she made about Excel, she believes they are building their own network -- wires, switches, and all. I suggested to her that it sounds like they are just a bulk reseller. She also, of course, couldn't quote any rates, only that it's "50% cheaper than ATT, blah, blah, blah." So, what's the story with Excel? ------------------------------ From: aerostar@ccia.com Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 22:53:35 -0800 Subject: Weird Stuff With Automatic Callback Gee, where do I start? For the record: I work out of my home. I have had two phone lines terminate here from Bell Atlantic since 1989. I had Bell Atlantic add a third line for my fax/computer in September. Bell Atlantic sends me three separate bills each month for local service. Home line long distance provided by LDDS WorldCom; Business line long distance provided LDDS WorldCom; 800 number that I have had since 1987 terminates on business line; Provided by LDDS WorldCom; Fax/computer line long distance provided by Excel (a friend in the MLM business wanted to sign me up.) An *old* girlfriend called me on my 800 line this evening. I have call waiting, and was on the *other* line. I told her I would call her back shortly. Did that and got a busy signal. For the heluvit, I tried *69. To my surprinse, I got the standard message that my call would be redialed. I thought this was strange since Suzi lives in Ameritech (Columbus OH) country. A bit later I get that distictive *ring* on my business line. However, another woman answered. I did not recognize the voice and asked for Suzi. This caused a comedy of errors since it turned out who I was talking to was the girlfriend of someone in my local calling area (Sara). I had tried to call them earlier from my home line, but got a busy signal. Sara does not have call waiting and I did not *69 that particular call. Was my business line somehow defaulting my *69 request to my home line? When Bell Atlantic (Bell of PA at the time) installed my second line in 1989 did they use the two *extra* wires coming into my apartment for this second line? When Bell Atlantic was here to install my third line, what did the technician really do; he told me he was *somehow* able to give me my third line without stringing more wire from the point of termination in my building. He spent 45 minutes of my time trying to figure out what his predecessor did to hook up my second line in '89, while telling me *If you ever want to have another phone line installed, you might want to move.* All of this, along with my trouble trying to explain what *star-sixty-nine* was to two females made for a good post I was writing when: Suzi calls me back on the 800 line. Hold on I told her, call you right back. Here's were this story gets better: *All circuits are busy, please try again later*. Just great. I try both lines several times; same. I call LDDS WorldCom's 800 customer service number; same. I try my LDDS WorldCom calling card access number; same. What's going on? I call my own 800 number from the home line; rings through OK. It's getting late, and Suzi is probably wondering why I have yet to call her back; lets try the fax line since the long distance carrier is Excel. I pick up the handset on my fax machine to hear the screech of my modem since I was in the process of sending a post to TELECOM Digest. Duh. After I shut down my modem, the call goes through, and Suzi asks me to call her back at a decent hour tomorrow. I have never had trouble such as this before, and would guess that my two problems are not related. But ... Any comments? Eric Friedebach aerostar@ccia.com ------------------------------ From: GORDONSBBS@delphi.com Subject: 1-800-MY-ANI-IS Now Requires Passcode Date: 21 Nov 1995 05:30:38 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation Has anyone tried this lately? It seems to require an access code now. Scott Gordon - SBBS Communications - (708) 256-4600 $0.179 Calling Cards For FREE - Pagers - Cellular Phones - Dial 1+ LD HTTP://CLEVER.NET/QMS/SBBS.HTM - SBBS@SBBS.NET For Automated Responses [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's right. Too many abusers were on that line all the time. MCI got some incredible phone bills on that and after a brief hiatus where no calls were accepted at all, now it can be used only with permission. Give it up, find something else. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 15:22:51 -0500 Subject: Notice re FCC Toll-Free NPRM Responses The deadline for responses to the FCC TOLL-FREE NPRM (CC Docket No. 95-155) was November 15th. It has come to our attention that responses delivered on the 15th via Federal Express are still at the Fed X office in D.C., as no one was at the FCC to accept them. Interested parties should follow up to ensure that their responses reach the FCC, when the agency opens up again. Judith Oppenheimer, President, Interactive CallBrand. A leading source of information and support on 800 and related issues. Producer@pipeline.com. 1 800 The Expert. 1 212 684-2714 (fax). http://www.users.nyc.pipeline.com/~producer/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The latest word is that everyone is back to work now, so persons who wrote at the deadline last week may wish to follow up now with a cover note saying that attempts were made to respond in a timely manner and that your follow up is being made only to insure that in the crunch of backlogged mail the FCC must be experiencing the original correspondence did not get lost. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Masoud Loghmani Subject: Question About 12 KHz and 16 KHz Payphone Signals Date: 20 Nov 1995 22:27:14 GMT Organization: Express Access Online Communications, USA Does anyone know of any international standard that defines the 12Khz and 16Khz charging signals for pay-phones? I specifically need information like duration, amplitude, and phase shifts (if any). I appreciate your help. Please reply to dti@access.digex.net. Masoud Loghmani http://www.access.digex.net/~dti ------------------------------ From: klein@snt.bellsouth.com Subject: BellSouth's Caller ID Deluxe Date: Mon, 20 Nov 95 15:21:00 EST To answer those BellSouth customers who have questioned the various aspects of Caller ID Deluxe: 1. The city/state names are starting to show up on inter-LATA calls as a result of the various long distance carriers implementing the FCC requirement to supply the originating number along with the call. This is supposed to be in place by December 1, 1995, but some carriers have already implemented the necessary changes. 2. The lower case city/state names, and the mis-punctuated "city ,state" that have shown up were due to a programming bug that has been corrected. All display names and city/states are now upper case. 3. The not-very-readable "NWYRCYZN01, NY" and "NASSAUZN04, NY" (and others) are being reviewed, and will probably be corrected in the near future. There are over 19000 different place names to be reviewed, so it may take some time. 4. A customer can always call BellSouth customer service with any questions about the service. Unusual, unreadable, or incorrect names and/or city/state designations that customers discover and report usually receive prompt attention and correction. I would be happy to answer any questions (or find out the answers) about the BellSouth Caller ID Deluxe service. Michael Klein, BellSouth Telecommunications, klein@snt.bst.bls.com ------------------------------ From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) Subject: Woman in New York Gets $25K Phone Bill From Nynex by Mistake Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 06:32:05 GMT Saw on the TV channel 7 (WABC-TV New York) local newscast a blurb about a woman in Queens (or Brooklyn, forgot which) who got a BIG suprise when she opened up the mail, a $25,000 phone bill. Many many pages of called numbers, lots international. It appears that some business "xxxx Cosmetics" (where xxxx is the same name as the woman's last name) should have received this bill, and the news reporters tracked down an address for the company at some office building. Nobody at that building had heard of that company. Maybe whoever skipped town, and gave the phone company a change-of-address to someone who happened to have xxxx for a name. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #491 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 22 15:47:44 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id PAA10308; Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:47:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:47:44 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511222047.PAA10308@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #492 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Nov 95 15:46:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 492 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Ton.Van.De.Peut@att.com) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Ross Oliver) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Rupert Baines) Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? (Steve Cogorno) Re: A Unique Pan-European Country Code? (Alex Hardisty) Re: Some More Notes on CID (Wil Dixon) Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service (aa2@vax2) Re: The Killer Application Myth (Chris Gray) Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming (Oliver Jones) 1 800 GOBBLE GOBBLE (Judith Oppenheimer) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ton.Van.De.Peut@att.com Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Organization: AT&T-NS-NL, Huizen - The Netherlands Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 17:29:48 GMT I remember the posting to one of the News groups earlier this year ... (if I'm right, it was about the 1st of April). This promises to be the solution for all your memory hungry net users ;-) Ton. ---------------- Subject: New for Linux! Memory sharing over the Internet! Date: 1 Apr 1995 00:34:51 +0200 Subject: Linus reveals: Linux creates memory! Newsflash! Linux Torvalds and Richard M. Stallman present revolutionary memory managment scheme: SMMP: Simple Memory Managment Protocol allows distribution of expansion RAM over Internet connections. Richard M. Stallman, genial author of the popular C-Compiler and the Emacs editor, founder of the GNU project, just released his RFC of the Internet SMM protocol. SMMP, the simple memory managment protocol, allows the distribution of local RAM to remote hosts via the popular Internet protocol suite. Just as other Internet protocols allow the distribution of local files, printers, mail or graphics with other hosts on the net, SMMP allows the sharing of RAM. "This is just the final step on the long road towards the virtualization of system ressources", Stallman says. "With standard Internet protocols users are already able to construct machines with virtual disk drives, virtual displays and virtual printers. For example, if you need additional disk space just to finish an important task, you just mount it over from another machine somewhere on the net. Your final files go again over the net towards some remote printer and with X you can even send your application windows over the network. But the final step was always missing." Stallman just finished the work on his Simple Memory Managment Protocol RFC. RFCs are the standardization documents of the Internet, specifying protocols and other technical details and procedures. "With any SMMP conformant implementation, operating systems can mount RAM from other machines just as disk space. They are able to share memory over the network just like they can share printers". With Stallmans protocol the road for implementations is open. Stallman emphasizes, that SMMP is completely independent of the underlying operating system technology. "With SMMP, a UNIX server could easily export its memory to VMS or MS-Windows clients, even to Apple machines. Best of all, SMMP is not even hindered by MS-DOS infamous 640 KB barrier. So SMMP is probably the best way to expand a DOS machines memory.", Stallman points out. Finnish computer geek Linus Torvalds, author of the freely available Linux operating system, got his hands on a prerelease of Stallmans specs. "I was completely stunned. Richards idea is completely obvious once you understand its basic principle of operation.", Torvalds told us. "I was able to implement basic SMMP support for Linux in just about a weekends work. SMMP integrates smoothly with the internetworking and the memory manager of Linux. I only had to make some minor modifications to the page fault handler, the rest was straightforward implementation of Richards SMMP primitives." This is because of Linux highly sophisticated memory managment system dealing easily with different types of RAM. "Older 16 bit based operating systems such as DOS will probably require much more work. They are best used as SMMP clients, though.", Linus notes. Linus has already integrated basic SMMP support into the coming 1.3.1 release of his Linux operating system, although there will be only SMMP client support in the first releases with an SMMP server being "in the works". Public Linux versions with complete SMMP support are exspected to arrive within this month as Torvalds announced. Some major UNIX vendors already reacted to Stallmans announcement. Digital Equipment Corporation donated a whole 50 Gigs of memory at it's decwrl network center for public use with SMMP. DEC CEO Bob Palmer announced Digitals move: "DEC always had a strong commitment to the Internet community and decwrl as one of the networks largest news hubs is perfectly located for such a service. DECs memory, driven by our newest line of 275 MHz Alpha processors, will also be one of the fastest in the world." By donating memory to the public, DEC hopes to push its line of Alpha processors and its OSF/1 operating system, which are the fastest currently available in the world but a complete marketing failure, too. Other majors vendors such as HP, IBM and SUN also announced public free memory pools, with IBMs journaled memory, a derivation of their journaled file system, being even crash resistent. SUNs CEO Bill Joy announced the SUN Online Memory Suite allowing for graphical administration of system memory, RAID-style mirroring of memory over the network and a technique called "memory striping and spanning". But the most interesting announcement came from virtual reality specialist Silicon Graphics, who gave some megabytes of Z-buffer memory to the network. SGIs memory will enable even slow PCs with common VGA cards to render photorealistic pictures and animations without hardware modifications. SMMP also greatly simplifies updates of networked hardware. Telebit and Cisco, manufacturers of Internet routing equipment, both plan to export the boot ROM code for their hardware read-only to the network. This scheme makes their hardware completely unhackable, but allows for easy, automated software updates without manual interception. First pre-alpha patches for the Linux memory handler are available from the usual FTP archives, that is from ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/incoming/linux/smmp-patch-01.tar.gz ftp://tsx-11.mit.edu/pub/incoming/smmp-patch01.tar.gz and all their mirrors. The current SMMP announcements can be obtained from vendor web servers such as http://www.dec.com http://www.sun.com http://www.ibm.com http://www.hp.com Microsoft plans to implement a different protocol of similar functionalitiy with Windows 95, to be released 2Q96. A description of Microsofts Memory Protocol, MMP, available over Microsoft Network (MSN) can be obtained at http://www.microsoft.com RFCs 1870/71 describe SMMP with RFC 1870 discussing SMMP itself and RFC 1871 covering the security aspects of a memory sharing protocol. See http://www.toppoint.de/~kris/smmp.html for complete coverage of all SMMP related topics. Kristian Koehntopp, 24114 Kiel e-Mail: kris@toppoint.de ------------------------------ From: reo@netcom.com (Ross Oliver) Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Organization: The Air Affair: http://www.airaffair.com/ Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 21:06:17 GMT Bill McMullin (bill@interactive.ns.ca) wrote: > Why don't we mobilize an effort to create the Community RAM Company. > Collectively, all the people on the Net (or a significant percentage of > them) could do one of two things: > 1) lobby the RAM manufacturers for more reasonable pricing (a big > buying group). > 2) initiate a business effort to create a company, financed by the Internet > community, and possibly other members, to manufacturer RAM, either by > buying a RAM manufacturer or creating one. Both 1) and 2) are based on the invalid assumptions that current RAM prices include large markups, and that volume purchases or self-manufacture could significantly reduce the price. In reality, commodity semiconductors, including RAM, is a highly-competitive (some might say cutthroat) industry, with razor-thin margins. The price you pay is *very* close to the actual cost. So why do these tiny slivers of silcon cost so much to make? A large portion of the cost is the manufacturer's investment in R&D and manufacturing equipment. Because of the rapidly advancing technology, semiconductor factories become obsolete very quickly, and must be in essence, thrown away and completely replaced every two to three years. Needless to say, this is very costly, and is reflected in the price of the product. > I realize this is pretty off the wall but I think the Net has finally > created a way for a lot of people with little effort to mobilize and > organize themselves. Additionally, the Internet community collectively > has a lot of money even if only a small amount from each person was > contributed. Any contributor would become a shareholder of the > Community RAM Company. Anyone who could not afford to be a > shareholder would receive the benefit of affordable RAM as long as > they could prove their economic position. Socialist Semiconductors, Inc. Despite computer manufacturers' claims to the contrary, RAM is not a necessity of life like food, clothing, and shelter. It is a tool, just like a power drill or a cellular phone. You use it either for pleasure, or for economic benefit (i.e. to make money). If the intended use is pleasure, there is no valid justification for subsidizing the cost. If profit is the motive, then the gain will exceed the cost, otherwise you should find a cheaper tool. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well what you say certainly has some > merit. But I think the prices will come down, even without a dedicated > effort by net people to make it happen. Personally I think we will > see complete desk top computer systems in the price range of $100- > $200 within a year or two. Sorry to burst your bubble, Mr. Moderator, but there will not be a $200 desktop PC in the near future. The economics of the sales channels do not make it profitable. PCs have had a price floor of about $1,000 for quite a few years. They do not get any cheaper, only more powerful. Part of what holds up the floor is the cost of certain components. Disk drives and monitors have reached a floor of about $200 each. If and when someone figures out how to make (and profitably sell) a 1.2 gig mass storage device or a 15-inch color display for $49.95, then we might see the floor of PC prices drop some more. ------------------------------ From: Rupert Baines Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Date: 21 Nov 1995 03:39:05 GMT In article Tim Shoppa, shoppa@altair.krl.caltech.edu writes: > In article , Bill McMullin > wrote: >> Wouldn't it be great to solve the problems of the digital poor? I >> agree with our Canadian friend who questions the high cost of memory. > Sorry, I have to disagree here. Memory is *dirt cheap* these days. I entirely agree with Tim. Stop being so greedy - memory is CHEAP, and "unnecessary". Sure, you need it for VRML and the like, but the net manages very well on very little memory Text only is possible - email and Usenet - even LYNX for the web. Or there are some very frugal shareware browsers that will run on a minimal machine. Just because you want the latest, greatest, all-singin' all dancin' Pentium is hardly a conspiracy - any more than the price of Ferraris is. >> How could anything produced in such mass quantity cost so much? Huh ??? Like cars you mean? Found a new car that costs less than a new PC ? "costs so much" ? If you buy a used car, why not a used PC? >> If they are trying to make use believe it is a commodity subject to >> supply and demand, why isn't it traded on the stock market? (Maybe it >> is, help me here.) Ummmm..... Do you know what on earth you are talking about ? (Clue - the answer is "NO" ) a) It *IS* subject to supply and demand. Very much so. Supply is finite (all fabs are at capacity). Demand is huge and growing. b) Stockmarket is by definition for COMPANIES. If you buy stock in Samsung or Micron or whoever, you are in effect buying shares in a memory business :) c) Perhaps you mean futures or options exchanges, as used in other THINGS (grain, oil etc)> There was an attempt to launch DRAM futures a few years ago. It failed, primarily because the market was too 'lumpy' and illiquid - only a few people made 'em, only a very few bought 'em, and the exchange was of little added value in marketmaking. ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: The "Information Appliance" -- A Telecom Point of View? Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 03:25:03 PST Giles Heron said: > IMHO the only reason to have a disk on a networked PC is lack of > communications bandwidth or server capacity. This is where the I completely disagree. Disks are proably the BEST primary storage medium on a network. Compare disk speeds to a network connection: Suppose you a have standard ethernet conenction between your machine and the server with no other traffic. (I know faster nets exist, but the lack of other traffic will make up for the increased performance of another network architecture.) Ethernet (IEE 802.3) 10 BASE 5: 10 Mbps = 1.25 MBps SCSI Disk = 8-10 MBps; Clearly the disk is much faster, even under optimal net conditions. In reality, the efficency of 802.3 is 1/(1+3a), where a = (Prop. delay)/(Packet Transmission time). On a heavily loaded network, efficency is about 53%. Also note that only 61% of the packet frame are user bits. So, typical Ethernet = 1.25 MBps * 0.53 * 0.61 = 0.38 MBps. I am not advocating removing networks, nor am I implying that the technology is unimportant -- clearly it is, or this forum would not exist. My point is that some computer hardware componets are rapidly evolving (processors are getting faster, disks are getting denser), and others aren't (core memory and networks). Compare memory speeds to processor speeds: common processors these days are around 80-120 MHz. Most memory sold is rated at 50-60 ns, which will support, at the maximum, a 20 MHz processor. How can these fast new processors function with such slow memory? By using a CACHE! Think of a local hard disk as a cache to the network. Do you REALLY want to have to do a net read every time you read a piece of a file? Disks are definitely an important part of any networked device, and if anyone tells you differently, they're lying :-) Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: Alex Hardisty Subject: Re: A Unique Pan-European Country Code? Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 09:30:36 GMT Organization: PQM Consultants, Chepstow Reply-To: Alex@pqm-cons.demon.co.uk In article: Mark Cuccia writes: > Europe is to request that the ITU make Country Code 388 available for > Pan-European services. Should this not occurr, then the European > telephone standards organizations are considering a national numbering > approach for Pan-European services, using the unused 00 capacity > behind existing County Codes. ... If only life were so simple! The issue of European numbering is the responsibility of ETO, the European Telecommunications Office, under guidance from the European Commission and the European Numbering Forum (ENF). According to my information, it is extremely unlikely that ITU-T will allocate a country code to Europe in the near future. Alex Hardisty PQM Consultants tel: +44 1 291 626 180 fax: +44 1 291 626 190 Email: alex@pqm-cons.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ From: wildixon@uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) Subject: Re: Some More Notes on CID Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:39:07 GMT Organization: University of Illinois Reply-To: wildixon@uiuc.edu Mark Cuccia wrote: > I tried to do *67 and the like from the Centrex. When I did *-6 (or > 11-6) I was cut off *right-away* to ringing. I don't know if this was > a Centrex internal number/service-code or not -- I hung up before > anything answered (even tho' it might have been an `invalid-code' > recording). When I dialed 9 (for outside calls) plus *67 (11-67) I got > cut off to re-order. The same happened (after dialing 9) with *82 > (11-82), *77 (11-77), *70 (11-70), *71 (11-71) {BTW, the centrex lines > did have 3-way on the line already}, *87 (11-87) and probably a few > others. Unassigned (or at least those not planned for use in New > Orleans) *XX (11-XX) codes gave me ringing and a recording, "...cannot > be completed as dialed. Please check your instruction manual or call > the Business Office for assistance" which I would also get on > NON-Centrex lines. Dialing some *-X codes BEFORE the `9' would > sometimes get a recording about calling the *attendant* for > assistance, while `0' without a 9 would get me a recording that office > hours are only on weekdays (this happened to be a Saturday). 9-0 would > give me Bell's operators. The code is *97, instead of *67, to block caller-id from a Centrex (TM), or equivalent, line. In some Centexs 1197 WILL NOT work, you must use *97! > As for CID-on-CW and other ADSI features, these new boxes (box-only) > will have to have two SPECIFIED modular jacks. One is for the line, > and the other can cut-off' what is plugged into it- this second one > for the phone. Where did you get thin information? My understanding is that the CPE equipment MUST mute the handset. BTW the jack you are describing is an RJ31X. > Actual phones with *built-in* CID-on-CW/ADSI features > have their handset completely muted (or switched out) of the line, so > data going back and forth (1200 Baud FSK from the switch, and DTMF > tones A B C D from the CPE) won't be corrupted by conversation or > background noise, nor annoy' the user. It only takes about a second > for the data to transmit back and forth, so there really isn't a loss > of conversation- only a slight dropout. If phones with the displays > built-in mute/switch-out the handset, then `stand-alone' boxes will > have to have a controlled jack for a `standard' phone. ------------------------------ From: aat@vax2.sagres.com.au Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Announces Caller-Pays Cellular Service Date: Mon, 20 Nov 95 19:07:53 +900 Organization: SAGASCO Resources Ltd. david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) writes: > Here in Australia we have always (as far as I know) had caller pays In the early days, called-party-pays was introduced by the Telstra monopoly. This was for the low monthly rate plan AMPS connections ($10/month and $20/month). When competition arrived (Optus) the same monthly rates were offered with no called party payment. Result: Telstra dropped its called party payment requirement. > The calls are charged at the 2nd highest STD rate for calls up to 745km and > the same as landline calls over this distance. This was the case about four years ago but fixed line call costs have fallen substantially since then. As a generality, per minute mobile call rates have not changed despite the arrival of competition. Telstra and Optus in particular have not altered their published rates, although Vodaphone and some resellers now offer some interesting alternatives such as Voda's one-rate national plan - expensive if you usually call locally but cheap if most of your calls are long distance. In general, fixed line call costs are well below mobile costs, except for some very short duration calls and Vodaphone's national plan (which comes with relatively high monthly fee). ------------------------------ From: cgra@btmaa.bel.alcatel.be (Chris Gray) Subject: Re: The Killer Application Myth Date: 20 Nov 1995 15:18:45 GMT Organization: Never was my forte Reply-To: grayc@btmaa.bel.alcatel.be > Interestingly enough, in France there are smartcard readers in many > phone booths now, since most of them can be used with prepaid calling > smartcards, charge cards, or regular calling smartcards with the added > functionality of being able to be "refilled" with money for phone > calls. This is the electronic purse. Actually it seems to be hard to find any other kind of phone booth in France these days: tough if all you have is cash or outmoded mag-stripe credit cards. This summer I was in a place called Le Rosier (population 27.3 and falling), and could not find a single phone booth which would accept anything less than a smart card. These had to be purchased from the post office or tabac at such times as the proprietor was neither sleeping nor eating (viz: 10-12 am, 3-5 pm). Chris Gray Chris_Gray@bcs.org.uk Compuserve: 100065,2102 http://plato.digiweb.com/kiffer/ Opinions expressed are purely personal unless otherwise stated. ------------------------------ From: oj@world.std.com (Oliver Jones) Subject: Re: Cell-One Boston - Disabled Roaming Organization: Vivo Software, Inc. Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 03:33:44 GMT In article , Scott Drown wrote: > ... It seems that Cell-One/Boston has summarily DISABLED ROAMING on > ALL phones that have not roamed in the past XXX days. The helpful > service person did not know how long XXX was. He did inform me that > this move was to combat massive fraud in roaming. Funny thing about that. I was a Cell-One/Boston customer until last July. My July bill arrived in a big fat parcel (I thought they were sending me a phone book or something until I opened it). It contained about $3000.00 worth of calls made from New Haven to all over New England and New York City, about one minute apart, 24 hours a day, starting at a particular time and continuing unabated until about a week before the bill date. It also contained calls from Bronx, but not quite as many. Some of these calls occured at precisely the same time as the New Haven calls. A few numbers showed up on the bill over and over. It was pretty obvious that some sort of organized operation was using my number. I called Cell One and told them what was up. They told me they would check it out. A couple of days later they called back and told me my phone had been used for fraud, and their remedy was to permanently disable roaming on that phone. "Wait a minute," I said, "I mostly use the phone when travelling." OK, they would change my phone number, and talk me through reprogramming the phone on the wireline phone they called me on. I ended up cancelling the service instead; I figured it was costing me a lot anyway and I didn't need the fear and loathing of being hacked. So now I have a nice Moto flip phone in a cardboard box and more money in my bank account. So, Cell One/Boston definitely has fraud problems. I guess theft-of- services isn't a very serious crime, otherwise the information on my bill could almost certainly have led to some arrests. It sure was a nuisance, though. Oliver Jones ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 23:08:45 -0500 Subject: 1 800 GOBBLE GOBBLE Wishing all a warm and serene Thanksgiving. Judith Oppenheimer, President, Interactive CallBrand. A leading source of information and support on 800 and related issues. Producer@pipeline.com. 1 800 The Expert. 1 212 684-2714 (fax). http://www.users.nyc.pipeline.com/~producer/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Judith's note was typical of the many received in the past couple days regards the holiday we observe at this time. I for one have a lot to be thankful for this year, and I know you do also. For me, its been the marvelous support received from Microsoft -- renewed, I might add for 1996, as was confirmed for me a couple days ago, thank you Charles and thank you Toby -- and the ongoing support the Digest has received from the International Telecommunication Union for about two years now. Without them, and especially Microsoft, I would have been out of here last summer, at what was probably the height of -- or perhaps depth of -- financial despair over the 'way things were going'. For many years also, I received a great deal of assistance from Northwestern University in the form of totally free, unlimited access Internet service; this alone was well beyond my limited budget. For just as many years, MIT has provided housing for the Telecom Archives, and now they are providing me with network connectivity as well. Yes, there is much for me to be grateful for; not the least of which are the many of you readers who have also voluntarily supported the Digest with a suggested annual donation of twenty dollars per reader/year. Do have a safe and happy holiday, and remember WHY we call it what we do. Take a moment to offer your own thanks, in your own way. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #492 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 24 09:58:20 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA29161; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:58:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:58:20 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511241458.JAA29161@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #493 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 Nov 95 09:58:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 493 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CRTC Public Hearing on Affordable Local Telephone Service (Nigel Allen) National Area Code Day (Mark Cuccia) Book Review: "IPng: Internet Protocol Next Generation" (Rob Slade) 25 Day Link Needed in Edinburgh (djsm100@cam.ac.uk) Pronto - Using Casual Calling Access For Long Distance (Dave Leibold) French Unique Agreement to Use Netscape Navigator (JeanBernard Condat) Conference: Call Centers on the Internet (Ian Angus) New Telco With Internet Dialout to BBS's Needs Beta Testers (M. Spencer) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:44:56 -0500 From: Nigel Allen Subject: CRTC Public Hearing on Affordable Local Telephone Service Organization: Internex Online, Toronto The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has announced plans to hold a public hearing on affordable local telephone service options. More information can be found on the CRTC's web site at http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/news/whatsnew.htm By way of background, local telephone service is becoming increasingly unaffordable for low-income consumers in Canada as a result of increases in monthly rates and installation charges and because of significant reductions in welfare payments in Ontario and possible future reductions in the federal government's unemployment insurance program. Provincial and federal government restraint programs are expected to result in a lot of people losing their jobs, and new entrants to the labor force having more difficulty finding work. In short, it's not a good time to be poor in Canada. In the past, the CRTC has refused to adopt a "lifeline" program which would provide low-cost telephone service to specified groups of low-income people. Instead, it has required telephone companies to offer two-party, black dial phone service at a somewhat lower rate than regular service, available to anyone who wants the lower-cost service, regardless of income level. I don't think this has ever been very satisfactory to the customers or to the telephone companies. (Usual disclaimer: I do not work for the CRTC or for a telecommunications carrier.) Here is the CRTC's news release: November 22, 1995 CRTC TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON AFFORDABLE LOCAL TELEPHONE SERVICE OPTIONS OTTAWA-HULL - The CRTC today announced it will hold a public hearing to consider mechanisms to ensure that local telephone services remain affordable for low-income consumers. The public hearing will begin on April 15, 1996 in Hull, Quebec (Telecom Public Notice CRTC 95-49). To make the process more accessible to the general public, there will also be a series of regional consultations held in major centres across the country. The dates and locations of these consultations will be announced in a future notice. "A few weeks ago, the Commission set out a regulatory framework aimed at establishing a stable competitive environment for telephone companies," CRTC Chairman Keith Spicer said. "It is also important, however, that local telephone service continue to be affordable to low-income consumers. This broadly-based, open process will provide an opportunity to hear everybody's views." The public hearing will look into a number of issues related to local service pricing options, including the range within which rates for local service would continue to be affordable, the scope of the services to be provided, the impact of pricing options on the competitiveness of the long distance and local markets, and concerns regarding other costs of local services such as security deposits, installation fees and service charges. Anyone wishing to participate in the Hull public hearing must notify the Commission in writing by December 19, 1995. The federally-regulated Stentor member telephone companies, Ed Tel and other parties must file submissions by January 19, 1996, reply submissions by February 19, 1996 and file arguments by the conclusion of the public hearing. Anyone may submit comments on the issues raised in this proceeding as long as they are sent in writing to the Commission before the beginning of the public hearing. Brief oral presentations can also be made at the regional consultations. - 30 - Contact: CRTC Public Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2 Tel: (819) 997-0313, TDD: (819) 994-0423, Fax: (819) 994-0218 Copies of today's public notice are available through our Internet home page (http://www.crtc.gc.ca) or by contacting the public examination room of any CRTC office: City Telephone TDD Fax Halifax (902) 426-7997 (902) 426-6997 (902) 426-2721 Montreal (514) 283-6607 (514) 283-8316 (514) 283-3689 Ottawa-Hull (819) 997-2429 (819) 994-0423 (819) 994-0218 Winnipeg (204) 983-6306 (204) 983-8274 (204) 983-6317 Vancouver (604) 666-2111 (604) 666-0778 (604) 666-8322 forwarded to the TELECOM Digest by Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen resume available on request ------------------------------ From: Mark Cuccia Subject: National Area Code Day Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 13:28:00 CST Did you know that North America celebrated National Area Code Day on November 1 (three weeks ago)? I was websurfing and tried again at Bellcore's pages to see if the North American Numbering Plan Administration or the Traffic Routing Administration (TRA) had anything yet on Bellcore's webpages. Doing a search on Bellcore's search pages for NANP and North American Numbering, I came across pages beginning: http://www.bellcore.com/demotoo/NANP It seems that the FCC declared Wed. 1 Nov. 1995 as "National Area Code Day". (But I don't seem to remember any special parties, celebrations, reductions- even one day eliminations in toll charges, paid holidays off from work, etc. on that day ) If we were supposed to be imitating the UK's phONEday which occurred this past April, we sure declared a date several months *after* our new `NNX' forms cut into service. And also, the UK's phONEday was really the first day after permissive dialling had *ended*, when the UK (+44) changed virtually *every* internal Areacode (STD code) by adding a leading `1' to most of the POTS/geographic codes while changing a few others, and the handful of non-POTS/non-geographic codes (for the most part) contiued to be left alone. Here in North America, only those areas where new areacodes of *either* the old or new format were directly affected. Of course, PBX and other CPE systems *everywhere* are affected since they have to be reprogrammed. Switched based services are modified by telco themselves, except for possibly some customer modifications to such things as switch-based `dialing lists' (Custom Calling & CLASS) even if that customer didn't have a new areacode in their own local dialing territory. And all we did here in North America is to *expand* the range of numbers that a 3-digit areacode could be a part of, from N0X & N1X to *all* possible NXX's by including the NNX format. What I *do* find amusing is all of these PBX system administrators wringing their hands about not knowing about the new NPA formats, or customers located in a new-form NPA lamenting that they can't receive calls. *I've* read articles as far back as the 1950's, in AT&T (*THE* Bell System) journals about future new numbering formats. The Winter 1959/60 issue of Bell Telephone Magazine has such an article which describes going to ANC- All Number Calling (i.e. changing the display of LEtters in EXchange names to all numerical digits), possible future use of N0X & N1X Central Office codes in the largest of metro areas by the early to mid 1970's (which did occurr in that timeframe), and possible future use of NNX form Areacodes sometime by the mid 1990's or the year 2000. This would allow the US & Canada to continue with a ten-digit national numbering format for many more decades into the 21st Century. And only *now* are the PBX/CPE users crying?!?!? But I *am* glad to see that Bellcore has *finally* put up some webpages with NANP and TRA info. And the Bellcore pages on the NANP new areacodes includes a list of 23 new geographic NPA's and the new `888' tollfree code. Each code can be 'clicked' on to get a more detailed text description, which includes the `test-number' (if available). However, the following upcomming code changes have NO mention in these webpages: 312/773 Chicago (city) 818/626 northern Los Angeles area 619/760 San Diego & southeastern CA area 216/??? another northeastern/Cleveland OH split 301/??? and 410/??? MD splits?/overlays? 817/??? Fort Worth area overlay nor any other additional code splits in 809-Caribbean nor anywhere else in the NANP. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I intend to begin announcing my phone as area code 847 beginning early in January; to heck with anyone who cannot reach me after that time! Let them argue about it with their PBX administrator, local telco, etc. And if you can't get through on my 847 number, then perhaps you can use my 500 number as an alternate. ... You don't really feel too sorry for any of those people do you? I remember an instance years ago when in this area we first started having phone numbers with 0/1 as the second digit of the number. A company I was involved with had a Rolm PBX which was not programmed to accept that combination. I sent two or three memos to the PBX admin telling him he needed to make that change. Everything I wrote was ignored. Ignored, that is, until the day I got a new voicemail number which started out that way. I changed my phone number in the company records to that number, and sat back to watch the fireworks. Sure enough, a few days later they wanted to call me about something, and their call would not go through. After a couple hours of deciding what to do, someone finally got the bright idea to go to the payphone in the employee's lunch room and call from there. It is time to start rubbing noses in messes, people. Any of you with one of the 'new' area codes, start giving it out exclusively. Fill out forms with your new area code; change your phone number with existing contacts to the new area code; flatly deny any connection with the old area code at all, even if there is a grace period of several months before it is gone. Companies which want to talk to you for some reason can't reach you? That's tough. This should be an excellent technique to use with bill collectors, etc. They'll go crazy trying to reach people. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 16:04:12 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "IPng: Internet Protocol Next Generation" BKIPNG.RVW 951027 "IPng: Internet Protocol Next Generation", Bradner/Mankin, 1996, 0-201-63395-7, U$33.95 %A Scott O. Bradner, ed. %A Allison Mankin, ed. %C 1 Jacob Way, Reading, MA 01867-9984 %D 1996 %G 0-201-63395-7 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. %O U$33.95 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 markj@aw.com 800-822-6339 %O 617-944-3700 Fax: (617) 944-7273 bkexpress@aw.com %P 336 %T "IPng: Internet Protocol Next Generation" The Internet is huge, useful and efficient. And, as with any such entity, it turns out not to be huge, useful and efficient enough. The Internet will allow more addresses than there are computers on the planet: therefore there is a desire to have enough addresses so that each individual on the planet can have a few dozen. The Internet can accommodate any type of data application: therefore there is a desire to run real time applications such as voice and video. The Internet makes the most effective use of multiple data channels between any two points: therefore there is a desire for effective use of all channels and points simultaneously. Internet applications rely on services provided by the current (IPv4) foundational Internet protocols. Future developments will require a new generation of basic amenities. This work includes papers by over forty authors describing the problems, concerns and proposed solutions involved in the task of specifying the IPng. The standards process; business, industry and government concerns; new technologies; new features; migration considerations; and proposed candidates are all examined. Few may be interested in this field. Great care, though, has been taken to ensure that all the material in this book is accessible not only to the technical audience, but also to those managers and executives who, while they may not build the next generation of networks, must choose, buy and support them. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKIPNG.RVW 951027. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. ROBERTS@decus.ca rslade@freenet.vancouver.bc.ca RSlade@cyberstore.ca The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it - J. Gilmore Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94311-0/3-540-94311-0 ------------------------------ From: djsm100@cam.ac.uk Subject: 25 Day Link Needed in Edinburgh Date: 23 Nov 1995 15:25:19 GMT Organization: Cambridge University I'm currently trying to find a practical way to connect the three largest venues in the Edinburgh Festival Fringe so our computerized Box Offices can sell each other's tickets. The trouble is we only want the link for approx 25 days (Aug-Sept) which means most solutions are out of the question (too pricey) unless someone is willing to help us out. Massive press coverage etc. is offered in return. Any ideas/offers of help gratefully received. Charlie Hartill djsm100@cam.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n259.z1.gryn.org (Dave Leibold) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 23:08:36 -0500 Subject: Pronto - Using Casual Calling Access For Long Distance Casual calling, or the means to select a particular long distance carrier during dialing, is commonplace in the U.S. what with customers being able to choose a carrier other than their default with those 10xxx codes (10288 for AT&T, 10222 MCI, 10333 Sprint, etc). Now in Canada, various ads from a service called Pronto is touting a casual calling access to an alternate long distance service. The idea is to dial the call as 10215 then 1+area+number for Canada/U.S./Caribbean calls, and 10215+011+ for other international calls. Pronto had their 215 CIC code (for the 10215 access) listed in the CIC lists of over a year ago. Only now do they appear to have widespread advertising for their service. The costs (according to Pronto) for calls from 416/905 to other parts of Canada are 34c/min peak (weekdays), 23c/min 5-11pm weekdays, 16c/min weekends and weekday overnights (11pm-8am). Within 416/905, the rate Pronto gave me was a straight 13c/min at all times. Unitel apparently also allowed casual calling with its 10869+ code, though they haven't advertised this. Bell Canada (and perhaps the other Stentor telcos in Canada) should be accessible as 10323+. Fidonet: Dave Leibold 1:259/730 Internet: Dave.Leibold@f730.n259.z1.gryn.org ------------------------------ From: JeanBernard_Condat@eMail.FranceNet.fr (JeanBernard Condat) Reply-To: JeanBernard_Condat@eMail.FranceNet.fr Subject: French Unique Agreement to Use Netscape Navigator Date: 22 Nov 1995 09:36:42 GMT Organization: FranceNet Bonjour, All over the French newgroups, you can read the incredible news this morning: the secret SCSSI (Service Central de la Securite des Systemes d'Information) from the Premier Ministre' desk in Paris have given their complete agreement to use Netscape Navigator. The document says: Titre: "Autorisation de fourniture et d'utilisation generale de moyens de cryptologie No. 2500" Signe: 7 Novembre 1995 Par: Jacques VINCENT-CARREFOUR pour la DISSI Reference: 509/DISSI dossier numero 950038 L'autorisation est fournie aux seuls produits Netscape Navigator suivants: N. DOS WINDOWS CD ROM N. DOS WINDOWS KX 23 N. MACINTOSH CD ROM N. MACINTOSH RX23 N. NT/INTEL CD ROM N. NT/INTEL RX23 N. NT/ALPHA N. X-WINDOWS N. WIN/95 16 BIT CD ROM N. WIN/95 16 BIT RX 23 N. WIN/95 32 BIT CD ROM N. WIN/95 32 BIT RX 23 Elle est egalement fournie aux distributeurs de la liste suivante et a eux seuls: Sun Microsystems Computers Digital Equipment Silicon Graphics Novell Siemens Nixdorf Olivetti Bull Zenith Data Systems Apple Computers Hewlett Packard Compaq Azlan Softway France Telecom Grolier Interactive Europe General Games Some remarks: it's no "s" to X-Window in the list of authorized products. This agreement "is good until 1st October 1997 for selling and use in France only." This authorization will be late to be given because of some discussions with other huge software publishers that don't have receive the same paper. It's the first time in France that an US specific software will be accepted in the cryptographic field by our Government. Bravo -:>] Jean-bernard Condat Computer Security Expert (Paris, France) ------------------------------ From: Ian Angus Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 14:47:26 -0400 Subject: Conference: Call Centers on the Internet Editorial Contacts: Gordon Mac Pherson Incoming Calls Management Institute 410-267-0835 e-mail 71137.2564@compuserve.com Ian Angus Angus Telemanagement Group 905-686-5050 e-mail ianangus@angustel.com Angus Telemanagement Group and Incoming Calls Management Institute Announce CALL CENTERS ON THE INTERNET Conference Toronto, Ontario, November 21, 1995 -- Angus Telemanagement Group of Ajax, Ontario and Incoming Calls Management Institute of Annapolis, Maryland today announced a new conference: CALL CENTERS ON THE INTERNET. The conference, to be held at the Phoenix Hilton in Phoenix, Arizona on August 27, 1996, will be the first to focus exclusively on making corporate and government users of 1-800 service knowledgeable about how and why to provide customer service, technical support, orders and reservations on the Internet’s World Wide Web. Special attention will be given to how the Internet is changing the mission and management of incoming call centers. Companies with call centers that already have sites on the World Wide Web include Federal Express, First Union Bank, United Parcel Service, Outrigger Hawaiian Hotels, Bank of America, L.L. Bean, Holiday Inns, Southwest Airlines and many others. Call Centers On The Internet will attract support from leading edge vendors who want to gain access to the most qualified audience in the world of call center services and equipment buyers. The conference will be co-located with and immediately preceding the world's most successful event for call center managers, the World Conference on Incoming Call Center Management (ICCM), now in its eighth year. The synergy, convenience and savings for attendees of coupling the two conferences together is expected to make coming to Call Centers On The Internet and ICCM even more appealing for vendors and attendees. ICCM's Call Center Resource Showcase -- the world's largest exhibit of Call Center products and services -- will feature a special Internet Pavillion, displaying Internet applications for call centers. Aspect Telecommunications, AT&T, IBM, and Rockwell International have already confirmed that they will participate in the Pavillion, and others are expected to join them soon. Gordon Mac Pherson, President of Incoming Calls Management Institute will serve as conference chairman for 1996. Mac Pherson says, "We think this is an area that smart call center managers will get on top of right away. There is no doubt that call centers will dramatically change once the Internet gains critical mass - and we're getting close. When companies like AT&T say they intend to 'lead their 1-800 users onto the Internet' and make it as easy to use as the telephone, you know something big is happening." Ian Angus, president of Angus Telemanagement Group, adds, "The goal, the test of our success, will be to attract a new audience component for Call Centers On The Internet while offering more to our existing audience for the World Conference On Incoming Call Center Management." #### Incoming Calls Management Institute is the leading thinktank and provider of educational events for incoming call center managers worldwide. ICMI and its associates now present regularly scheduled or private courses throughout the United States and in Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Scandinavia and Australia. In addition, ICMI is a principal organizer of the World Conference On Incoming Call Center Management, the United Kingdom Conference On Incoming Call Centre Management, and the Telecommute series of conferences. ICMI has been completely dedicated since 1985 to the proposition that incoming call center management is a growing profession with its own unique training and education needs. Angus Telemanagement Group is a research and consulting firm, specializing in strategic business applications of telecommunications. Angus publishes Canada's leading telecommunications journal, TELEMANAGEMENT, as well as books on topics ranging from ISDN to toll fraud, and presents seminars and conferences on a wide range of topics. Our sister company, Angus Dortmans Associates, provides management advisory services to Canadian organizations that rely heavily on telecommunications to advance their business goals. Our mission is to assist clients to make better telecom decisions, by providing top-quality insight, counsel and direction. ### IAN ANGUS Tel: 905-686-5050 ext 222 Angus TeleManagement Group Fax: 905-686-2655 8 Old Kingston Road e-mail: ianangus@angustel.ca Ajax Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 http://www.angustel.ca ------------------------------ From: Martin Spencer Subject: NEW Telco With Internet Dialout to BBS's Needs Beta Testers Date: 21 Nov 1995 20:17:57 GMT Organization: Cosmos International, Inc. We are beta testing a new Internet service which allows individuals and/or companies to "dial out" to modems (BBS's, etc.) from the Internet. For example, someone on the net in Australia or South Africa can telnet to our system and our system will allow access to the 100+ BBS's in Dallas, Texas. Just telnet to bbs.thecosmos.com (206.13.82.2) to log on to COSMOS. There is NO charge to the 500 beta testers we need. Those signing up within the next three days will get a minimum of 60 hours FREE. Later, when we complete beta testing and begin charging, beta testers will get a special, discounted rate from us. Our home page is at: www.thecosmos.com Thanks for taking the time to try out our new service. You may email us on our system. Have fun surfing in a new BBS domain! David, Kelly, & Martin ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #493 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 27 10:27:09 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA02360; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:27:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:27:09 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511271527.KAA02360@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #494 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Nov 95 10:27:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 494 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Stalking Cellular Bandits (San Jose Mercury via Tad Cook) Sprint Spectrum PCS System (Greg Monti) Book Review: "LAN Times Guide to Telephony by Bezar" (Rob Slade) Hotel Long Distance Charges (Rob M. Saiter) Bell South Trim Line Phone (Thomas Neudecker) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tad Cook Subject: Stalking Cellular Bandits Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 23:39:53 PST Forwarded to the Digest FYI, from the {San Jose Mercury News} where it appeared over the weekend. ---------------------- Once-top-secret spy technology used in battle to foil cellular bandits FROM COLD WAR TO CELL WARS By Lee Gomes Mercury News Staff Writer THE COLD WAR is over, but there's no rest for the weary. Now, some of the same people who helped defeat the "Evil Empire" are hard at work against a new enemy. And what a wild crew is this latest batch of bad guys: Dr. Who, ColdFire, OleBuzzard, Cool8. In one of Silicon Valley's most remarkable defense conversion stories, a group of engineers from ESL Inc., the ultra top-secret but somewhat stodgy Pentagon sub-contractor in Sunnyvale, has become the nucleus of a hot high-tech start-up in one of the nation's most sizzling markets: cellular telephones. Using sophisticated technology originally developed to keep tabs on the communications from Soviet submarines and ships, Corsair Communications Inc. is doing battle with a new and altogether domestic opponent: cellular phone pirates. In just six months of operation, Corsair's "RF fingerprinting" system has become the bane of cell phone thieves in much of Los Angeles, its first major test. It's done so well, in fact, that telecommunications experts say the system could represent a major new defensive capability in the war against "cloned phones," a multi-billion dollar annual scam as well as the biggest growth industry in the underground economy. That would come not a moment too soon for Barbara Grossman, an Apple Computer sales representative who, like untold thousands of other cellular phone users, has been ripped off by cellular bandits. In fact, Grossman has had it happen twice just in the last 18 months. Once, she got a bill for $600 in calls she didn't make; the other time, it was for a whopping $11,000. While Grossman said her carrier promptly and without any questions reversed the charges, she had to deal with all the logistics of a new telephone number, like informing friends and family. "It was a real annoyance," she said. Corsair's "PhonePrint" is aimed at ending that annoyance by taking advantage of a simple technical insight. In the same way that individual people will have slightly different handwriting or fingerprints, any two radio transmitters will send out a radio frequency, or RF, signal in slightly different ways. If you can learn the "fingerprints" of all the different transmitters used by your opponent, something both Americans and Soviets tried as part of their Cold War espionage arsenal, you'll know a lot, such as whether a given transmission is from the massive aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov or the lowly supply ship Ivan Kucherenko. Decades of research ESL, which was bought by TRW Inc. in the late 1970s, worked on RF fingerprinting at the Pentagon's behest for decades. And the same techniques that were applied against the Soviet Navy can now be used against big-city cell-phone fraud because cellular phones are radio transmitters, too. In fact, two cell phones that roll off the same high-tech assembly line one after another will have enough subtle differences -- such as in the tolerances of their various resistors and capacitors -- that the signals they emit will be completely distinguishable from each other, as long as you know what to look for. And that's become the chink in the armor of phone cloning, currently the state of the art in cell phone fraud. In normal cellular operations, a phone trying to call someone first sends two numbers to the receiver at the nearest cell site: its own telephone number, and a special electronic serial number that's hard-wired into it. But because the current cellular system was designed years ago without any apparent regard for either privacy or security matters, those numbers are transmitted unencrypted over open airwaves. Thus, it's a simple matter to grab them out of the air and to then reprogram them into a second phone. The equipment to do both, though illegal in California, is sold in a booming gray market. The second phone can then be used freely and for free -- at least until the rightful owner of the pair of numbers gets a monthly statement and notices all the calls that he or she never made. At that point, the cell carrier cuts off service, forcing the owner to get a new phone number. TRW, realizing the commercial potential of the technology for the cell phone business, created a new business unit called TRW Wireless Communications in 1993 to try to sell it. Clash of cultures At first, the business went nowhere. But rather than giving up, TRW shopped the idea around to the local venture capital community, and found believers at Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers. Kevin Compton, the Kleiner Perkins partner who is chairman of the Corsair board, said the earlier incarnation of the company didn't work because of a "mismatch of cultures. A group with a traditional military bent who was moving at government rates of speed was trying to enter a very rapidly moving business." That changed when the unit was spun off last year into a separate company, and when new managers were brought directly in from the cellular industry, including Mary Ann Byrnes, a Cellular One veteran, as president. (At the Compton household, Corsair is something of a family affair; wife Gayla thought up the name, a reference both to a famous pirate ship and a W.W. II fighter plane.) After two rounds of investments, the second of which, worth $8.8 million, was just concluded, venture capitalists and private investors own 60 percent of the firm; the other 40 percent is split between TRW and Corsair's employees. Corsair's system puts the equivalent of a 486 computer with 20 megabytes of RAM and a 540 megabyte hard drive into each cell site. (While usually hidden from users, these sites are the backbone of a cellular system, containing both transmitters and receivers as well as a triangular antenna. There are about 500 cell sites in the Bay Area, divided between two cellular providers, and roughly twice as many in Los Angeles.) The system builds a data base of the fingerprints for each phone, through normal usage. Then, when it notices a mismatch between an RF fingerprint and pair of numbers, it assumes the pair of numbers have been illegally entered into a second phone. The call is simply not put through. How effective is Corsair's technology? The system has been fully operational since summer in more than 100 of the Los Angeles cell sites with the highest fraud rate, and Melissa May, a spokeswoman for cell carrier Airtouch, said the company is "impressed with the results. We think both the company and our customers have benefited." Corsair's computers prepare daily reports about its effectiveness, and while the company doesn't want the exact numbers publicized, they show it blocking tens of thousands of clone calls a day -- on a daily caller volume of well over 500,000. A full-scale deployment of Corsair in a market the size of Los Angeles would cost, the company says, several million dollars -- though Corsair says carriers will quickly recoup their losses because of the sheer scope of the problem. Phillip Redman, who covers telecommunications for the Yankee Group in Boston, said cell phone fraud can cost U.S. carriers as much as $2 billion a year. Easy pickin's So, exactly how hard is it to get a cloned phone? Not very, according to a 21-year-old Los Angeles resident who goes by the name of "Motorola," and who is not, it scarcely needs saying, affiliated with the cellular phone manufacturer of the same name. "In fact, I'm talking to you on one right now," he said in a recent interview. As "Motorola" described it -- his views were echoed by people inside the industry -- big cities abound in cloned phones and in the pairs of numbers needed to activate them. The trash containers outside the offices of cellular providers are a frequent target: Paper records have been known to contain pairs. Employees inside the industry are bribed to turn over the numbers. And most commonly, cell pirates just drive around mining numbers out of the air -- sometimes collecting hundreds or thousands in a single cross-country jaunt. And where to buy a cloned phone? That too, said "Motorola," is not hard; a good place to start is in small electronics or hot rod shops. "Usually, the guys there are up to their eyeballs in something," he said. "Just start chit-chatting. Ask about `chipped' phones. They say `chipped' phones, even though that's not the correct terminology. They should be called `clones.' People haven't been putting chips in phones in years." Complex criminal web Law enforcement officials and others say the sociology of cell fraud is rather complex, involving different social circles with very little contact with each other. "Motorola" and his friends, the hackers with colorful "handles," are this world's brain trust. One of their favorite methods of transmitting information is -- surprise, surprise -- the Internet. Many, like "Motorola," even have their own World Wide Web home pages. Most hackers aren't in it for the money, but instead for the kick involved in doing something both technical and verboten. They also delight in tormenting carriers. Far more venal, though, are the clone phone entrepreneurs who build thriving businesses with the hacker's discoveries. Cell fraud has become so lucrative that some drug dealers have switched careers, attracted by the absence of stiff prison penalties associated with the drug trade. The San Jose man who cloned Grossman's phone, and who is now behind bars, was said by prosecutors to have taken in nearly $2 million. Until now, cell-phone fraud has been most commonly associated with large inner-city immigrant communities, where people often want to call a far-away home. So advanced are some of these businesses that for a set fee, say $75, cloners will guarantee cellular service -- to the point of sending out a runner with a new pair of numbers whenever the phone is shut off. But the view at Corsair is that cell phone fraud is very rapidly moving into the middle class. "We're starting to see all kinds of people use it, from college students to real estate agents," said Bill Taliaferro, the firm's director of communications. Airtouch says it is committed to eventually using RF fingerprinting in more markets besides L.A., though the company said it does not yet know which company it will buy the added units from. RF fingerprinting is so hot that Corsair already has two competitors, though analysts say Corsair is benefiting from its head start during the Cold War. Head start "From a technical perspective, Corsair is way ahead," said John Lo, a telecommunications specialist at Pittiglio, Rabin, Todd & McGrath, a consulting firm. Mike McKinley, an ESL veteran in Corsair's R&D department, said some of the elements in RF technology are so difficult to master that "you wouldn't get it right the first 10 times you try it." (The mere fact that McKinley was being interviewed was another sign of the changes for the former ESL workers, some of whom previously couldn't talk about their work even with their families.) Corsair technicians like Bob Stoddard, who know all about the world of counter-counter intelligence, spend much of their time looking for holes in their system. To change a fingerprint, they've tried putting phones in freezers or using them with drained batteries or dropping them on the floor, but none of them beat it. Evolution of fraud But cell pirates turned to cloning phones in the first place only after other fraud methods were shut off to them. With so much money at stake, a similar evolution is expected again. Corsair, in fact, knows what it will be -- a technique known as "roaming," but one which actually works to the company's advantage. If all cell sites in Los Angeles have RF fingerprinting (Airtouch's competitor, L.A. Cellular, is testing the system as well) then it will be impossible to gets pairs of numbers from L.A. That will force pirates to do their shopping elsewhere; getting serial numbers from low-crime areas where carriers haven't installed RF fingerprinting, and then selling them back in areas where people are clamoring for them, like Los Angeles. Ultimately, then, to be effective, the technology will need to be deployed on a nationwide basis, with all 600 of the companies staying in touch. Analysts like International Data Corp.'s Iain Gillott expect that to happen eventually, and for carriers to continue using some of their existing anti-fraud system, such as "profiling" software that spots unusual usage in the same way the computers at credit card companies do. With full deployment, he said, high-tech fraud like cloning may well abate. But not all fraud. There will be "subscription fraud," in which cell thieves impersonate legitimate customers. And there will always be old-fashioned bribery of inside employees. "If the CIA has problems with this, so will cellular companies," Gillott said. But even if it's not a complete solution, Corsair's technology seems to be enough to impress current cellular users, who are tired of bracing for a surprise every time they open their monthly phone bill. "It's seamless to the user and it blocks out the bad guys," said Grossman, the pirate's victim, when Corsair was described to her. "I like that very much." Published 11/26/95 in the {San Jose Mercury News.} ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 10:42:17 PST From: Greg Monti Subject: Sprint Spectrum PCS System Pat, please excuse the long list of selling points below. I don't work for Sprint Spectrum but wanted to give a summary of what's in their literature for interested TELECOM Digest readers. The long-auctioned and long-publicized wireless Personal Communications Service (PCS) is now up and running commercially in the Washington-Baltimore area. The service is branded Sprint Spectrum and is owned by American Personal Communications, "A Sprint Telecommunications Venture Affiliate, Bethesda, MD." APC is one of the "pioneer preference" PCS licensees that did early research and test-marketing work for the FCC and has (so far) avoided having to pay for its radio spectrum through an auction. It is partially owned by the Washington Post Company. Phone 800 311-4220. Sprint Spectrum has taken pains to differentiate itself from cellular, with which it sees itself as a low-cost competitor with more and cheaper features. The cheapest package costs $15 per month and includes 15 minutes of airtime, which may be any combination of peak and off-peak minutes. Peak minutes occur between 7 AM and 9 PM weekdays, same as for the two cellular carriers in the market. Additional minutes beyond the 15 included ones are 31 cents each, whether peak or off-peak. The most expensive package is $150 per month, which includes 600 peak minutes and 600 off-peak minutes. Additional minutes under this plan are 25 cents peak, 10 cents off-peak. There are four additional levels of service between those two extremes, ranging in price from $25 to $90 per month. All levels of service include "answering machine," numeric paging and caller ID. Call Waiting is optional ($2 per month) on the three cheapest plans and is included in the three more expensive plans. A "Handset Replacement Program" (insurance) is included in the four more expensive plans but costs $4 per month under the two less expensive ones. There's a listing of "voicemail" at $2 per month under optional services on their rate card, but it doesn't say how that's different from "answering machine." Directory Assistance is 50 cents per call and includes call completion. On-demand audio information services are 50 cents per minute by dialing *INFO. Outgoing completed local landline calls are 10 cents per call. There are also "daily handset-delivered services" (sports, weather, horoscope, lottery), which I assume are text delivered to the handset display, for $6 per month. "Twice daily handset delivered services" (traffic, news, financial) are $12 a month. Financial Portfolio Custom Stock Tracking Delivered Services are $25 per month. Call Forwarding is $2 per month. "Call Barring" is $5 per month. I think that allows you to restrict incoming and outgoing calls to or from certain countries, area codes, prefixes or individual numbers to control costs. A text messaging feature is $10 per month and allows senders to send up to 100 text messages per month to your handset from their own personal computer or from another handset (I wonder how you type them in from the handset). Additional messages are 10 cents each if user-typed, 50 cents each if operator-typed. There is no minimum contract. The first minute of each incoming call is free so you can hang up on junk callers without paying for it. Users can choose the last four digits of their handset phone number subject to availability. Users can select their billing date. Sprint long distance is available for either 22 cents per minute peak and 10 cents per minute off-peak -or- 15 cents per minute flat rate. I did a price comparison of Sprint Spectrum with Bell Atlantic Virginia landline phone service for a "light user" profile who makes only 15 local calls of 5 minutes each per month. Bell Atlantic Virginia landline service (assumes no extended area calls): Economy Message Rate base service $5.00 Federal Subscriber Line Charge $3.50 Virginia Relay Center surcharge $0.10 voice mail $5.00 call waiting $3.50 caller ID $6.50 15 untimed local calls @9.6 cents each $1.44 ------- $25.04 plus tax Sprint Spectrum wireless service (assumes no incoming calls): cheapest monthly plan $15.00 call waiting $ 2.00 minutes beyond free 15, 60 @ 31 cents $18.60 completed local call charges 15 @ 10 cents $ 1.50 -------- $37.10 plus tax Both services include free touch-tone. I'm sure I've left something out of this analysis but it appears tolerable for a light user to cancel his or her landline phone service and have a portable phone for an extra $12 a month. The coverage map they hand out is divided into three areas: "high quality coverage available now," "variable coverage available now" and "additional coverage available during 1996." The "high quality" area covers almost the entirety of Washington and Baltimore Cities, about an 8-mile-wide swath between cities (which contains the four main highways and two commuter rail lines between them) and swaths of decreasing width extending out each of: - Intersate 270 to the northwest of Washington, - Routes 7 and 66 to the west of Washington (beyond Dulles Airport), - Intersate 95 south of Washington, - Interstate 83 north of Baltimore, - Interstate 95 northeast of Baltimore, - Interstate 97 south of Baltimore, and - US Route 50 from Washington eastward beyond Annapolis. The "additional 1996" coverage includes mainly: - Interstate 70 west from the Baltimore Beltway to beyond Frederick, - Prince William County, Virginia between Interstates 66 and 95, - US Route 301 from US 50 south to Waldorf, Maryland, - Maryland Route 140 northwest from Baltimore, and - further coverage extensions on Interstates 95 and 83. The text accompanying the map notes that service may be impaired in wooded and hilly areas, inside buildings and on trains. Sprint Spectrum sells service in shrink-wrapped boxes containing phones and accessories. All phones sold are handsets, none are intended for hard-mounting in vehicles, although I'm sure that's available. Phones are widely sold in appliance and electronics chain stores, but the company has a retail store devoted only to their products in downtown Washington on 18th Street NW between M and N. This store may be more for public relations purposes as it is within a convenient three or four block walk of the Federal Communications Comm- ission, most K Street communications law firms and lobbyists and at least two TV network news bureaus (ABC and CBS). I have no relationship with Sprint Spectrum other than as a curious consumer and Telecom Digester. Greg Monti Arlington, Virginia, USA gmonti@cais.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 03:02:05 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "LAN Times Guide to Telephony" by Bezar BKLTG2TL.RVW 951027 "LAN Times Guide to Telephony", David D. Bezar, 1995, 0-07-882126-6, U$34.95 %A David D. Bezar dbezar@primenet.com %C 2600 Tenth St., Berkeley, CA 94710 %D 1995 %G 0-07-882126-6 %I McGraw-Hill/Ryerson/Osborne %O U$34.95 905-430-5000 fax: 905-430-5020 510-548-2805 800-227-0900 %P 450 %T "LAN Times Guide to Telephony" While reading through this book, I had a number of reactions that didn't stand up to later scrutiny. For data communications professionals, telephony is the mysterious stuff that goes on "inside the wall", and that the telephone company won't tell you about. The book contains little technical material on the technical side of telephony, and it does touch on many areas which would be seen as part of telecommunications. However, for the average manager, or the computer professional who is not heavily involved with communications, this is likely a distinction without a difference. Indeed, this is not a technical book in terms of detail. The most sophisticated technology described inside is the installation of a telephone. (Readers: do not try this at home! :-) A very broad range of concepts are discussed briefly. Ultimately, the book resembles nothing so much as a topically organized and tutorial glossary. This makes for a very readable, but not heavy, introduction to telecommunications for the manager, non-communications professional, or interested computer user. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKLTG2TL.RVW 951027. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca Institute for rslade@cln.etc.bc.ca Research into Rob_Slade@mindlink.bc.ca User Rob.Slade@f733.n153.z1.fidonet.org Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ From: rob.m.saiter Date: 26 Nov 95 14:15:11 Subject: Hotel Long Distance Charges While staying in a hotel in Chapel Hill, NC last week, I was charged a _long distance surcharge_ to call a number in near by Research Triangle Park, NC. The hotel's number is 919-909-xxxx while the number I called is 919-558-xxxx. According to the front desk manager, the hotel has no choice but to impose this outrageous fee since the local phone company considers calls within the 919 area code but between different counties to be long distance. I was finally able to have the charge removed from my bill by arguing that because I was only required to dial 9, 558-xxxx without using the area code, I was not aware that the call was long distance. Anyone from this area (Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill) of NC that can substantiate either side of this argument, please e-mail me at rob.m.saiter@ac.com or reply back to TELECOM Digest. ------------------------------ From: Thomas Neudecker Subject: Bell South Trim Line Phone Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 01:19:09 -0500 Organization: Sponsored account, Drama, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA I just received a Bell South Trim Line telephone. It appears to have ten numbers programable for speed dial and three E-Dial numbers. Other services such as redial and memo are avaible. But Bell South doesn't support the hardware. Anybody have some programming tips? Tom Neudecker TEN+ Technology for Education & Non-Profits TEN+@cmu.edu Voice: 502 683-8267 or 683-2577 URL= http://www.occ.uky.edu/~tndecker ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #494 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 27 13:37:31 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA16103; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:37:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:37:31 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511271837.NAA16103@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #495 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Nov 95 13:36:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 495 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Enhanced 911 Blues (Stephen J. Mahler) Faculty Opening at Ohio State (Jane Fraser) Telecommunications History in Old Phone Books (Nigel Allen) 411 v. 113 ; Directory v. Information (Mark Cuccia) Connecting Residential Lines to KSU (Doug Lawlor) Serial Port Options (Steve Winter) Pacific Bell Billing Incompetence (Jack Hamilton) SAC 888 Acknowledged in Recorded Announcement (David A. Cantor) Engineers For DPNSS Project for AT&T Network Systems (Anne Baillie) First Call For Papers - ISLIP'96 (Dr. Edward Ashcroft) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mahler@usl.edu (Stephen J. Mahler) Subject: Enhanced 911 Blues Date: 26 Nov 1995 23:11:54 GMT Organization: Univ. of Southwestern Louisiana Folks: I have been working this problem for what seems like a year, with no real results. I am interested in any information or pointers that lead to completion of this effort. Goal: Interconnect G3R switch via Bell South to Local Government PSAP for delivery of calling party number to be used in Enhanced 911 operations. Situation: 1) G3R has 8 ISDN-PRIs connecting the switch to the LEC (Bell South). 2) G3R can transmit Calling Party Number (CPN) per call on PRI D channel. 3) Bell South termination of PRIs is a DMS-100. 4) Bell South DMS can read the CPN, and delivers it to a plain jane BRI station on the same switch. 5) Bell South claims only CAMA trunks may be used to signal to 911. CAMA is a trunk that is routed to 911 when seized, orginator sends ANI as MF signals, Bell South converts MF to DTMF and delivers to PSAP. 6) AT&T says the G3R does not generate MF for the US (but does a European MF, sigh), and there is no interface card to a CAMA trunk. 7) AT&T says -- no problem -- buy a $50,000 third party switch to hang on the side of the G3. Includes points of failure, separate programming, maintenance costs, etc. (I say nuts!) 8) The University wants to be a good citizen and participate in the E911 system. x) The larger problem that the E911 databases do not take into account extensions that are not DID numbered. Any and all help appreciated! Especially looking for PSAPs getting numbers directly from PRI CPNs. Thanks, Steve Mahler, Director Information Networks Univ of Southwestern Louisiana 318-482-6418 (v) 318-482-2489 (f) ------------------------------ From: fraser@ccl2.eng.ohio-state.edu Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:29:41 EST Subject: Faculty Opening at Ohio State People who apply operations research to telecommunications problems are encouraged to apply for the following faculty positions. If you have questions, email me (Jane Fraser) at fraser.1@osu.edu. Here is the official job announcement: The Department of Industrial, Welding and Systems Engineering at The Ohio State University invites applications and nominations for tenure-track faculty positions at the Assistant Professor level. Higher ranks may be considered for exceptionally qualified individuals. Candidates for all positions must hold a Ph.D. degree in industrial engineering or a related engineering discipline. Successful candidates will demonstrate high potential for excellence in teaching, research, and service, and a strong commitment to undergraduate education. One opening is in the area of statistical applications in manufacturing engineering. Experience in the design and planning of engineering experiments, engineering data analysis, statistical process control, process capability analysis, and the general application of statistical methods to engineering problems are necessary. The candidate will be expected to develop innovative approaches to teaching design of experiments and statistical analysis to students in undergraduate engineering laboratory courses. Additional openings exist in the traditional areas of industrial and systems engineering including manufacturing systems, production, and applied operations research. The Department and the College of Engineering at OSU have numerous on-going programs and activities in manufacturing engineering, including a Practice-Oriented Manufacturing Engineering Program, the National Excellence in Materials Joining Education and Training Program, the Engineering Research Center for Net Shape Manufacturing, world-class facilities in several manufacturing processes, and numerous centers. There are considerable opportunities for participation in research activities and for interaction with professionals from manufacturing and service industries. Department faculty are also involved in research activities on campus through the Cognitive Systems Engineering Laboratory, the Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications, the Biomedical Engineering Center, the ElectroScience Laboratory, and the NCR Biodynamics Laboratory. The department maintains strong working relationships with departments in the College of Engineering and with other key departments at the University. Candidates for all positions will be expected to participate in teaching at both undergraduate and graduate levels, and to develop an active program of research with funding from government and industry. The department is searching particularly for individuals with interests in collaborative research and teaching activities and commitment to expanding the diversity of the profession. Industrial experience is desirable. Screening of applications will begin not later than March 1, 1996, and will continue until suitable candidates have been identified. It is expected that successful candidates will start in September 1996. Applicants must send a letter of interest, a vita (with citizenship and visa status) that includes a list of publications, a one-page statement of current and planned research activities, and the names of three references (with addresses, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses) to: Search Committee Chair Department of Industrial, Welding and Systems Engineering The Ohio State University 1971 Neil Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43210-1271 Voice: (614) 292-6239 Fax: (614) 292-7852 E-mail: in care of miller.6@osu.edu The Ohio State University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer. Qualified women, minorities, Vietnam-era veterans, disabled veterans, and individuals with disabilities are encouraged to apply. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 18:06:34 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Telecommunications History in Old Phone Books A telephone book from the 1950's or earlier can give you some insights into telecommunications and society in general. And your local public library may have a good collection of old telephone books, either the books themselves or on microfilm or microfiche. Look at the introductory calling section. You'll see unfamiliar codes for reaching directory assistance and the long distance operator. You may see a list of neighborhood telephone company business offices and payment agencies that have long since disappeared. Places that you now think of an an integral part of your city will be shown as being a long-distance call from downtown, and when you look at the directory listings for those places, you'll see listings for the business serving a rural community, not today's suburban sprawl. A lot has changed since then, but some listings have stayed unchanged, except for a new prefix added when communities moved to seven-digit phone numbers. The number shown for Canadian National's Toronto telegraph office, EM8-6041, in a late 1950's Toronto telephone directory, is still in use by Unitel today. Apart from call centers, the most likely places to have the same phone number today as forty years ago are businesses that have been in operation in the same location and that haven't grown much. I found that Parkdale Fur Company in Toronto's economically stagnant Parkdale area was one such company. Nigel Allen ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen resume available on request [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are a lot of instances in the Chicago area of businesses having the same phone number for much longer that forty years. Chicago Transit Authority has had the number 312-MOHawk-7200 since it was founded in 1947, having inherited it at that point from its predecessor Chicago Rapid Transit Company which had it since whenever earlier than that. The Chicago Hilton has had WABash-4400 since the days when it was the Conrad Hilton Hotel and even prior to that as the Stevens Hotel. The earliest references I recall seeing for the number were in the 1920's -- seventy years ago -- when it was the Stevens. I'd estimate there are a couple dozen instances in Chicago of the same telephone number working at the same business place for seventy years or longer. Regarding residences, you will see the same thing now and then. I knew a family in Chicago a few years ago who lived in the same house their parents and grand- parents had lived in. The phone number had never been changed since the grandparents built the house sometime in the late 1920's. It was like a sub-division and all the houses had been built by the same developer some seventy or so years before. They all looked the same, but most had changed owners/residents many times over the years. In their case, the grandparents had raised the parents there; when they died they left the property to the parents (of the man I know) who raised their family there. His brother and sister moved elsewhere but he stayed there, got married and was living there with his wife and two children. I guess it never occurred to anyone to change the phone number. Out of curiosity one day at the library I looked at the microfilms of old phone books; I selected 1929-30 and looked up the family name. There it was at the same address and same phone number as it was in 1993; same last four digits as always with the only change being that MIDway had evolved over the years to MIdway-3 then to MI-3 and for thirty years or so, 643. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Cuccia Subject: 411 v. 113 ; Directory v. Information Date: Sun, 19 Nov 95 23:08:00 CST In TD 15:488, Doug Faunt (faunt@netcom.com) asks about the above subject line. I don't know the *exact* date that Information became known as Directory Assistance, but I think that many BOC's and LEC's began changing the name sometime in the early to mid 1970's. I remember when local Information, in-state 555-1212, interstate/Canada and 809 555-1212, as well as (AT&T or Bell System) operator connected information in a foreign (non-NANP) country was ALL FREE!! And many of us *still* call it Information rather than Directory Assistance, or at least use the terms interchangeably. As for when 411 began to be used or what was used before then -- `N11' codes have been around since the early 1920's for special telco services. - 211 Long Distance Operator (now obsolete, but 'somewhat' replaced by `00') - 411 Directory/Information - 611 Repair - 811 Business Office - 911 Emergencies (reserved/implemented beginning in the mid 1960's) Other N11 codes have been used in some places, and not all codes have ever been 100% standardized or uniform. Some N11 codes were used for ANAC, Ring Back, Test Board, etc. The N11 codes were `primarily' used in areas where most local switches were Common Control (such as Panel, #1 Crossbar, #5 Crossbar, ESS, Digital), although Step offices have used them as well. In locations where Step by Step was the dominant type of local switching, `11X' service codes were used prior to the early 1960's, although Panel and Crossbar offices `could' use them as well. - 11-1 just got absorbed and did 'nothing' (11-11111....) - 112+ for DDD Access - 113 Information (Directory) - 114 Repair - 115 special 'leave-word' operators (for conference, mobile, marine, air, etc) - 116 'toll-station' operators for nearby rural points - 117 Test Board - 118+ for 4 & 8 party ringback - 119-1 for 2-party ringback - 110 Long Distance Operator. Again, not all 11X codes used were 100% standardized or uniformly allocated. Some places even had 11X codes for Time-of-Day, Weather, Business Office, etc. When DDD began to move forward, particularly from Step offices, and a 1+ was decided to be a common toll access/identification prefix (although even 1+ has never been uniformly standardized or defined), many step areas reconfigured their hardwired routing/switching plans to use N11 codes. This began in the early 1960's, but didn't happen overnight. Many step areas (particularly non-Bell independent areas) had continued to use 11X codes, some as late as the 1980's (or early 90's), even after converting from Step to ESS/Digital. Today (and since probably the late-1960's), the NANP `ideal' standard for `11' is a pulse/rotary option for `*' for most Custom Calling and CLASS features (although some telcos still are using NX-# for activation/deactivation, in addition to N-#/NX-# Speed Dialing `Use'). Codes such as *67 can be pulse/rotary (AND even touchtone) dialed as 11-67. I don't think that there are any areas in the US or Canada using 'old-fashioned' 11X codes anymore, but there might still be a few in the Caribbean. I don't know how this will conflict with the * or 11- for CLASS/Custom-Calling Vertical Features. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We never did have 811 for the business office here. The business office was always -9411. In manual offices it was always just ask the operator for 'business office' or ask for 9411, your choice. IBT headqarters downtown was OFFicial-9411. 9411 was pretty much the standard for the telcos around this area. Then when telco opened several new business offices back in the 1950's they proceeded to number them all -9100, but the main office downtown stayed 9411 for the corporate offices and OFficial-3-9100 for the public office on the first floor. We did have 811, but it was not widely known. It started in 1942 as the military version of 211. From manual offices, to make a long distance call you asked your operator for 'long distance' and were connected to another operator who then proceeded to place the call. In a dial office, you dialed 211. When the Second World War started, AT&T was very short on circuits, and the long distance lines were constantly jammed. Sometimes you had to 'book' your call and wait a couple hours until a line was available (that was always the case on international calls, where the delay was anywhere from several hours to as much as two days) and a delay like this was intolerable to the military and the War Effort as you might imagine. Thus, Illinois Bell had 811 for 'priority long distance' and this was used primarily by military personnel who had the authority to instruct the operator to make a long distance circuit available to them immediatly. During WW-2, the Hilton Hotel (then known as the Stevens Hotel) was seized by the government and turned over to the military for their exclusive use in housing troops being moved in and out of the USA, etc.) They made all their long distance calls via the operator on the other end of 811. It was not at all uncommon to be on a long distance call and have the operator cut in on the line and say "sorry, line is needed for the War Effort, please finish your call now." You had exactly fifteen seconds to say goodbye and hang up, otherwise the line was disconnected and taken from you anyway. That meant that General So-and-So was trying to make a call to Washington for example. In 1946 they no longer needed Priority Long Distance, so 811 was put into other use, for 'Hotel Time and Charges Long Distance'. Hotel switchboards needed a way to get time and charges on calls back on a prompt basis in order to bill guest calls since the guest might be checking out shortly thereafter. Larger hotels and transient institu- tions (for example hospital switchboards, university switchboards, etc) always did have 'tie-lines' direct to long distance. That is, the PBX operator could plug into a certain jack on the board which by-passed the local operator and went direct to the long distance operator. She did not have to give her phone number, since LD knew the call was coming (for example) from the Stevens Hotel or the University of Chicago. All the PBX operator had to do was pass the extension number being used. But smaller places without those direct lines to long distance had to dial 211 like everone else and say to operator as the first thing, 'hotel time and charges', their phone number *and* the extension number being used. If they forgot to say that, they did not get the charges quoted at the end of the call and the PBX had no way to reconcile its phone bill at the end of the month with a guest who had long since checked out leaving an uncoll- ectible phone bill. So IBT had all those hotel, hospital and similar PBX arrangements start using 811. They got the same long distance operators as everyone else, but it was understood that calls via 811 were commissionable to the PBX and had to have time and charges quoted immediatly when the call was finished. The larger institutions usually had a telex machine direct to long distance and a clerk at telco would send the 'T&C' back to the PBX operators (or clerks) via the telex as they occurred. Some institutions did not have a telex to the LD operators and they relied on getting their T&C called back to them usually every fifteen or twenty minutes for calls which had been completed in the interim. The telco clerk would call back to the PBX clerk and rattle off charges as fast as she could. They did not like to repeat themselves so you listened up and took notes fast. A typical call back with T&C would have five or six completed calls to report and went like this: "This is Kenwood (central office name) with T&C on six calls. Tell me when you are ready." "Ok go." "Extension 1234 up at 10:04 AM for 9 minutes to New York City at Murray Hill 9-3671 station call charges three dollars eighty cents and I am 72534 (LD ticket serial number), you are?" "I am U of C number 2307 (University of Chicago PBX ticket serial number kept by PBX operator for accounting purposes)." Next, extension 4507 up at 10:06 AM for 2 minutes to Los Angeles, California at HOllywood-4-1600 person call Doctor Smith charges two dollars sixty cents. I am (LD ticket serial number), you are?" "I am U of C number (PBX ticket serial number)". "Next, extension 5678 up at 10:07 AM, zero minutes to Boston, I don't have the number, operator did not write it down, this was DA (did not answer), no charge. I am (serial number), you are?" "I am U of C number (serial number) I am showing that as DA, the number could not be provided is that correct?" And on it would go, a slow call back might only have two or three T&C's to be quoted to the PBX; a busy session might have a dozen. If it was constantly busy with LD traffic all the time, as a large hotel would be, then telco send all the quotes back on telex instead. The rule was the PBX generally got a 10-15 percent commission from telco for handling the call, but had to guarentee payment to telco for all of the transient user's charges. The PBX would claim you did not give us T&C in a timely manner, the guest checked out before we could get T&C and apply the charges to the guest ledger at the front desk. Telco's proof that they provided T&C (and they did screw it up sometimes and not give it) was they would then quote the PBX ticket serial number which applied. "How could we have gotten your ticket serial number had we not quoted charges to your PBX operator". Telco also would write off any charges made by a guest at the hotel if it could be proven they had not quoted T&C, i.e. they could not come up with a valid serial number from the PBX. 811 stayed in service until the early 1980's and ESS was installed everywhere. Once ESS was being used, all the PBX's started using zero plus, and the display the operator got on her console told her it was a hotel/hospital/university/etc. When the call was finished, the computer automatically kicks it back to some avail- able operator for the purpose of quoting T&C. Last item in today's history lesson: a phone book from 1944, with a page devoted to the War Effort. A cartoon shows a family of mother and father, a couple of kids, and grandmother gathered around the telephone. One is holding the receiver and listening, the others are anxious to have their turn to speak. A caption says sternly, "Loose lips sink ships. We at AT&T are so pleased when we can connect you with your loved one in the military at a far away port. Please do not compromise our nation's security by asking him to tell you things he is not permitted to say. As much as he wants to let you know he is safe, there are some secrets he is forbidden to talk about. Please do not ask him to compromise the safety of his fellow soldiers and his nation's security by telling you secrets entrusted to him. And likewise, there are times our operators have been entrusted with military secrets in the process of helping the young men telephone their families. Our enemies might overhear your phone call, so please don't ask our operators to violate the trust placed in them when handling the call from that special soldier or sailor. Remember! Loose Lips Sink Ships. (The AT&T Logo). PAT] ------------------------------ From: dlawlor@specialty.com (Doug Lawlor) Subject: Connecting Residential Lines to KSU Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 09:44:15 GMT Organization: Specialty Access Consulting The following article was posted by me in 'comp.home.automation'. I thought someone in this newsgroup would be able to shed some light on my question. Thanks in advance, Doug FROM: dlawlor@specialty.com (Doug Lawlor) SUBJECT: Connecting Residential lines to KSU DATE: Fri, 24 Nov 95 22:30:21 GMT ORGANIZATION: Specialty Access Consulting Hello everyone, Is it true that you are not allowed to connect, what are termed residential telephone lines, to a KSU? I was told last year by a KSU/PBX installer that the telephone company will not connect residential telephone lines to a KSU. If this is true what is the reasoning behind this? Why can't I get two residential lines or what ever the limit is nowdays and connect them to a call distribution system such as a KSU instead of having seprate lines with plane old telephones connected? Comments anyone? Doug Specialty Access Consulting Voice: (709) 773-0037 Suite 215 38 Pearson St. Fax: (709) 773-1020 St. John's Nf. A1A 3R1 Internet: dlawlor@specialty.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Quick summary. I do not know the rules in Canada; here in the USA the installer would be dead wrong. You can get whatever residential lines you want and connect them to whatever type of phone instruments you want. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Winter <74107.210@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Serial Port Options Date: 27 Nov 1995 03:33:50 GMT Organization: compuserve.com Press Release: The STB 4COM card is now available with alternate addressing that allows up to 4 of the cards (16 serial ports) in one machine using Ray Gwinn's famous SIO drivers under OS/2. It also works quite well with Linux and other Unix based platforms. You can share one IRQ per card under OS/2 with Ray Gwinn's SIO drivers! 4 port, 16bit, High Speed serial I/O card, that provides 4 high performance RS-232 Asynchronous Serial Communications ports, each on one separate IRQ, or allows sharing one or more IRQs. Each port INDEPENDENTLY configurable by jumpers for addresses: h3E8, h2E8, h1E8, h1A8, h3F8, h2F8, h1F8, h2A8 and for IRQs 15, 12, 11 10, 5, 4, 3, 2 * With address option You CAN use 4 4COM Cards in one machine * Address option gives h100, h108, h110, h118, h120, h128, h130, h138 There is no additional charge for alternate addressing, just ask for it. LIFETIME manufacturer's warranty and free tech support from STB. Works fine with DOS, DESQview, DV/X, Windows, and OS/2 3.+ These products are available from the following vendor: For Orders *ONLY* 1-800-SELLCOM(735-5266) Ext 9 (VISA/MASTERCARD) For Technical Questions, leasing, or outside USA call 919-286-1502 or 24 hour FAX at 919-286-4617 As seen in SysOp News, BBS Callers Digest The sun never sets on the PRIME network 919-286-2100 300-33600bps ------------------------------ From: jfh@acm.org (Jack Hamilton) Subject: Pacific Bell Billing Incompetence Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 04:11:30 GMT Organization: kd6ttl I receive local telephone service from Pacific Bell, and they've generally been pretty good -- I've rarely had problems, and they've been quickly resolved when they did occur. So, I thought I would be safe signing up for their new automatic payment plan. There are two options -- you can have the payment automatically deducted from your checking account, or you can choose to manually activate electronic payment each month. I chose the first, completely automatic option. I sent in the form and received a letter back saying that payments would start being made automatically (this was in October). A few days later, I received a regular bill, with no sign that they knew about the auto-payment option. I called the business office, and was told "oh, we don't have any kind of records for that. You'll have to talk to the electronic payment office." That office said everything looked OK, so I decided not to worry about it for the time being. I just received my November bill. An aside here. PacBell has recently switched to duplex printing for bills. They announce this on every page with "Two-sided form saves paper!" printed at the top. The first physical page has "Page 1" printed at the top. In the middle, it says "Total Due To be automatically paid from your bank account on Nov 30, 1995 139.54". "DO NOT MAIL YOUR PAYMENT, IT WILL BE AUTOMATICALLY PAID." is printed at the bottom. They have also printed (with the printer, not as part of the preprinted form) little boxes for me to fill in the amount I'm paying, along with their address printed so it will show in the return window envelope they also thoughtfully provided -- for my collection, I suppose, since they don't want me to send them anything. You might think that the back of this page would be numbered "Page 2". It's not. It doesn't have a number at all. On to the next physical page. It's numbered "Page 2" at the top. The back of this page is labeled "Page 3". No foolish consistencies here, either with the first page or with the standard numbering scheme used in almost every other printed matter I've ever seen. We go on for a few pages of call detail until we get to page, well, another unnumbered page. It's the front of physical page 4, what PacBell would have called page 6 if they'd put a number on it, and what everyone else would call page 7. And it says, near the top "IF YOUR PAYMENT HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED, OR CHARGES DISPUTED, BY Nov 30, 1995 , YOUR SERVICE WILL BE TEMPORARILY DISCONNECTED." That space before the comma was in the original. And at the bottom there's another set of printed boxes and return address, with the instruction "PLEASE DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION WITH YOUR PAYMENT" (no period at the end of that sentence, even though there was not one in the equivalent sentence on page 1.) I wonder, does no one at Pacific Bell do any kind of quality control? I don't expect them to read every bill individually before it is sent out, but it's not unreasonable to expect consistency within a single bill, or standard page numbering, or for the billing office to coordinate with the automatic payment office. Jack Hamilton jfh@acm.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would be very reluuctant to let anyone just automatically dip into my meager funds month after month just taking whatever they wanted. I belong to a few of those plans where charges are debited to my checking account each month, but I have to specifically call each month and put them through. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David A. Cantor Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:57:16 EST Subject: SAC 888 Acknowledged in Recorded Announcement I dialed 800-555-1212 today to get a number. After the usual report of the number I requested, there was a message as follows: Please note that in 1996 toll free numbers can be either 800 numbers of 888 numbers. It's coming. David A. Cantor +1 860.444.7268 (444-RANT) 453 Bayonet St., #16 Connecticut has a new area code. New London, CT 06320 ------------------------------ From: Anne Baillie Subject: Engineers For DPNSS Project For AT&T Network Systems. Wiltshire Date: 27 Nov 1995 12:35:35 GMT Organization: S-Com CSE Engineers for DPNSS project for AT&T Network Systems. Wiltshire On the Web S-Com are the appointed recruitment advisors to AT&T Network Systems. Two engineers are currently required. Location Malmesbury, Wiltshire. Project An Intelligent Network project involving ISUP signalling work and interfacing to ETSI INAP and DPNSS. Roles 1. Telecomms Engineer with DPNSS skills. He/she is needed to work on the design phase through to coding. 2. An engineer with ISUP and DPNSS skills. The work entails ISUP signalling and interfacing to ETSI INAP and DPNSS. Rates Good. Start date ASAP. Contract length 6 months. Other lures Working in one of the leading forces in telecoms today. Key skills DPNSS INAP ISUP Length of experience Experienced engineers needed to work in a small team. Please email your CV to Anne Baillie or contact me direct on 01296 311421 S-Com CSE, Buckingham House, Buckingham Street Aylesbury, HP20 2LA Phone 01296-311411 Fax 01296-436895 General enquiries / CVs Visit our Web site ------------------------------ From: Dr. Edward Ashcroft Subject: First Call For Papers ISLIP96 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 12:00:00 GMT Preliminary Call for Papers ISLIP'96 The Ninth International Symposium on Languages for Intensional Programming May 13-15, 1996 Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA Objectives __________ There is a growing interest in computational models and/or programming languages and systems based on intensional logics such as temporal logic, interval logic, modal and intuitionistic logics. In fact, a whole new programming model called intensional programming has been created with applications in a wide range of areas including parallel programming, dataflow computation, temporal reasoning, scientific computation, real-time programming, temporal databases, spreadsheets, attribute grammars, and hardware synthesis. This symposium aims at bringing together researchers working in all aspects of this area, and to promote intensive discussions and foster collaboration among researchers. We encourage papers dealing with the theoretical foundations, design, implementation and prototype development issues, comparative studies, and applications, as well as those describing new challenges arising out of applications. The symposium will include, but will not be limited to, the following topics of interest (as they relate to intensional programming): Programming paradigms Semantics * dataflow computation * non-determinism * connectionist models * extended Kahn principle * logic programming * intensional concepts * real-time programming * termination issues * languages such as Lucid and GLU Software Engineering Applications * version control * signal processing * visual user interfaces * image processing * parallel programming * hardware synthesis * fault-tolerant systems * graphics * program verification * data models * the intensionality of WWW Submissions ___________ You are invited to submit either a full paper or an extended abstract of approximately 5000 words (10-15 double spaced pages). The cover page should include the name, phone/fax numbers and e-mail address of the contact author(s), a short abstract, topic(s) and a list of keywords. Papers will be reviewed by the program committee for their originality, correctness, significance, and relevance to the symposium. We prefer PostScript or self-contained LaTeX submissions via electronic mail to the e-mail address below. You can also send 3 hardcopies of your submission to the following address. Submissions should arrive no later than February 15, 1996. Edward A. Ashcroft / ISLIP'96 E-mail: ed.ashcroft@asu.edu Department of Computer Science & Eng Phone : +1 602 965-7544 Arizona State University Fax : +1 602 965-2751 Tempe, Arizona 85283, U.S.A. Authors will receive notification of acceptance by March 20, 1996. The papers to appear in the pre-proceedings that will be distributed at the Symposium are due on April 12, 1996 (preferably in PostScript or LaTeX form, sent by email). The symposium will be held on May 13-15, 1996 at Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA. At the Symposium, the research will be presented and also citiqued, and the resulting modified, final papers will appear in a book entitled Intensional Programming II, published by World Scientific Press. (ISLIP 95 resulted in the book Intensional Programming I.) The details about registration and accommodation will be provided later. Symposium Chair _______________ Edward A. Ashcroft Arizona State University Local Arrangements ___________________ Tony Faustini Arizona State University Important Dates _______________ Submission Deadline: February 15, 1996 Notification: March 20, 1996 Revised Versions due: April 12, 1996 Symposium: May 13-15, 1996 Further Information ___________________ Contact: ashcroft@asu.edu faustini@asu.edu (for local arrangements) Latest information about the Symposium will be made available via the WWW page: http://lu.eas.asu.edu/islip96.html ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #495 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 28 10:23:32 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA28780; Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:23:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:23:32 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511281523.KAA28780@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #496 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Nov 95 10:23:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 496 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Connecting Residential Lines to KSU (Tony Harminc) Re: Connecting Residential Lines to KSU (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Re: Connecting Residential Lines to KSU (Mike Curtis) Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? (Mike Morris) Re: Dates of Start of 411 and Directory Assistance vs. Info (A. Schoolsky) Re: Dates of Start of 411 and Directory Assistance vs. Info (Eyre-Eagles) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (George Gilder) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Sany M. Zakharia) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Tom Watson) Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? (Brian Brown) Re: BellSouth's Caller ID Deluxe (Ronell Elkayam) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 18:38:41 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Connecting Residential Lines to KSU dlawlor@specialty.com (Doug Lawlor) wrote: > Hello everyone, Is it true that you are not allowed to > connect, what are termed residential telephone lines, to a KSU? I was > told last year by a KSU/PBX installer that the telephone company will > not connect residential telephone lines to a KSU. If this is true > what is the reasoning behind this? Why can't I get two residential > lines or what ever the limit is nowdays and connect them to a call > distribution system such as a KSU instead of having seprate lines with > plane old telephones connected? Not quite. The restriction is that you may not connect POTS lines to any device that automatically selects an outgoing line for you, such as a PBX. There is no residential/business split here, except that you can't get residential rate PBX trunks. Any kind of line may be connected to a key system, as long as the caller manually selects the outgoing line (or the key system picks up, say - line 1 when you lift the receiver, but is not capable of selecting at random or the least recently used, or somesuch). The reason for this situation is that historically PBXs talked to the CO via trunks, while telephone sets and KSUs used POTS lines. Typically PBXs subjected the trunks to much higher call loading than did a single phone on a POTS line, so the trunks were priced a good deal higher than POTS. This situation managed itself for many years, until the technology changed so that there is no significant technical difference between a trunk and a line. (Well, there *are* some meaningful differences, but there's no reason at all why a PBX can't deal with the CO on POTS lines for outgoing calls.) Some businesses started ordering POTS lines (business rate lines, mind you) instead of trunks, and saved lots of money. So the telcos got the CRTC to forbid such connections. In the case of a PBX or any device the telco thinks might funnel traffic automatically from multiple phones to one line, they will demand an affidavit from the customer and/or PBX supplier to the effect that it is configured so as to disallow such access. It's not unusual to see a copy of the affidavit stuffed in behind a connecting block in the telephone room - presumably to remind installers thinking of making changes. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: rec@goodnet.com (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Subject: Re: Connecting Residential Lines to KSU Organization: GoodNet Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:59:47 GMT Pacific Bell will connect residence service to a KSU but you have to pay "complex residence" rates (1FW/1SY). The monthly rate is the same but the install is higher (it was 70.75 before IRD, same as business install). Your best bet is to get the lines connected to a SNI, Entrance Bridge or some other device to keep telco happy, them makre your own connections. Pac Bell will connect residence lines to a RJ21X, but they charge extra for that too. I have not found anything at US West that addresses terming lines on a KSU. I am going to say the same for USW as I would for P*B, term the lines on a SNI, Protector or Entrance Bridge and run your own IW. Richard Eyre-Eagles, KJ7MU Tempe, Arizona ------------------------------ From: wd6ehr@kaiwan.com (Mike Curtis) Subject: Re: Connecting Residential Lines to KSU Date: 27 Nov 1995 23:47:46 -0800 Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310-527-4279,818-756-0180,909-785-9712) I also don't know about Canadian regs, but in the USA, the telephone company will not "connect" lines into a KSU (unless they're selling it to you). You can do it, or hire someone else to do so. There are (supposedly, anyway) rules against business and residential service in the same place, but they've never been enforced (that I'm aware of, anyway). And with all the people working at home these days, that's a pretty dumb rule anyway IMHO. I have many customers with key systems in their homes. It really makes a lot of sense if one can afford it, especially in larger houses. Mike Curtis wd6ehr@kaiwan.com ------------------------------ From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: Call Forwarding to Avoid Long Distance - Legal? Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 06:05:10 GMT rec@goodnet.com (Richard Eyre-Eagles) writes: > Corey Hauer (hauer@deskmedia.com) wrote: >> I am providing internet service to several communities in a rural >> area. A very-small community serviced by GTE near one of my POPs is a >> long distance call from me but a local call to another GTE-serviced >> community that can call me without a long-distance charges. I want to >> enable people in the small town to call my service without >> long-distance charges. >> Maybe mistakenly, I called GTE and asked them if I could get a line in >> the community and have it forwarded to my main number. GTE told me >> "no way, that would be violating the tariff". >> I know of many ISPs and BBSs that use call forwarding in the same >> manner to extend their service area. Is GTE correct, would I be >> violating a tariff. >> What could happen if I had a friend of mine in this town get a line >> pointing to me? Or is GTE blowing smoke? > There is another factor to consider. Will your telco forward more than > one call at a time? In California, GTE there is known to only allow 1 > forwarded call at a time. > As far as tariff compliance, when I worked as a Service Rep at > Pac*Bell, I got an executive complaint. It was a BBS operator > complaining about an advertisment about another BBS advertising > forwarding numbers which are residence class of service (which is flat > rate, business is all measured), and the complaint is "if he can do > that, why can't I". It turns out that we had to either disconnect or > change the forwarding lines to business class of service. > California's tariffs are still strict about business on residential > service. I do the technical work at a small answering service here in the Pacific Bell area of Los Angeles. This service caters mainly to movie and TV stunt people - 14 CO lines on 20-button 1A2 phones, believe it or not. The proprietor is a former stunt lady who was disabled in a traffice accident (her last movie was "It's a Mad, Mad World") and has been in business for over 20 years. To save her customers money, she has three foreign exchange numbers that call forward to the first line of her eight-line hunt group. Pacific Bell was quite happy to set these up for her -- there is no physical telephone anywhere, just a number that magically points somewhere else; for example, a 818-760-xxxx that points to 818-886-xxxx. She also has a number in the 805 area code and one in 213 (L.A. County has all or part of 6 area codes in it, soon to be more). And these call forwarding numbers can handle as many simultaneous calls as she has numbers in her 818-886 hunt group -- the service rep claimed that they are only "busy for a tiny moment, just as long as it takes for the call to bounce off it and go to its real destianation". By the way the service rep called them "stepping stones", and volunteered the fact that she could have one set up in GTE if it was required, but "it was more difficult" (the L.A. area is a mix of GTE and PB). To change the topic, and since I was asked this a few days ago, it seems that my friend can not get any more CO lines, as she has maxed out her facilities (she is running this answering service out of her garage, as a quite legitimate and legal home business). Can Pacific Bell force her to pay their expenses to bring in more copper? What are her options? A T1 channel bank feeding the 1A2 KSU? Or what? She wants to add a 50 number DID later on. Lastly, is there any kind of a answering service equipment resellers trade journal -- something like {Telecom Gear}? I know there are computerized telephone answering consoles, but I do not know who makes them, or where to locate some (new or used). Mike Morris morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us ------------------------------ From: Adam Schoolsky Subject: Re: Dates of Start of 411 and Directory Assistance vs. Information Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 10:50:02 -0800 Organization: Northwest Antique Technology Seems to me it was about 1970. I remember, as a kid, using 114 for Information in the LA area (Pacific Telephone). I think 113 was for repair service, and 811 was for business office. Adam KM4MF Adam@ArtDeco.com ------------------------------ From: rec@goodnet.com (Richard Eyre-Eagles) Subject: Re: Dates of Start of 411 and Directory Assistance vs. Information Organization: GoodNet Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 01:39:13 GMT Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 (faunt@netcom.com) wrote: > When did 411 get to be the standard number for Directory > Assistance/Information? What was used before that? > When was Information renamed to Directory Assistance? In GTE areas, the DA code used to by 113. Back in the 60's, San Diego's emergency number used to be 116. (Which is interesting since it is 911 upside-down). To this day, you can dial 118 in Las Vegas and get the time and temp. Richard Eyre-Eagles, KJ7MU Tempe, Arizona ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 15:15:27 -0500 From: gg@gilder.com (George Gilder) Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance > Does anyone know why memory prices haven't fallen at the same rate > that CPU prices have fallen? What's the scoop? The technology curves > would see to indicate that memory would get cheaper faster than CPU's > (after all memory chips are "easier to design".) DRAM prices plummetted, dropping 50 percent per bit every 18 months for some twenty years, until the rise of GUIs, Webs, 3D games, color printers, CDs and other RAM hungry applications quadrupled the use of RAM per PC between 1993 and 1995 after annual PC sales surged up from some 25 million to 50 million between 1991 and 1993, when Grove and Gates had estimated only 35 million units. Whatever you think of Intel, Grove was willing to lead the market, investing some ten billion during the early 1990s in new microprocessor fabs while the Japanese and Korean underestimated DRAM sales. DRAM manufacturers are now investing like crazy, with some 75 new fabs under construction, but contrary to the innocent proposals around here that a bunch of ISPs get together and erect a fab or two, mass DRAM production for millionths of a cent per bit is still the most exacting manufacturing challenge in technology. George Gilder [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Just a reminder that several of George Gilder's published essays have been made available to the Telecom Archives by Mr. Gilder and are available for your review. You will find them in a sub-directory in the archives under his name. The Telecom Archives is accessible using anonymous ftp ftp.lcs.mit.edu PAT] ------------------------------ From: zakharia@WPI.EDU (Sany M. Zakharia) Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 22:38:51 GMT Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute In article , reo@netcom.com (Ross Oliver) wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well what you say certainly has some >> merit. But I think the prices will come down, even without a dedicated >> effort by net people to make it happen. Personally I think we will >> see complete desk top computer systems in the price range of $100- >> $200 within a year or two. I think this is a tad too optimistic. You can hope to but a good pocket computer/scientific calculator for that price. Sany [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So are you saying merely that my timing is off (regards when the price will come down) or are you saying it never will get that low? My first four function calculator back about 1970 or so cost me over four hundred dollars! Today they are in the eight to ten dollar price range. In 1978 a friend of mine had a Texas Instruments TI-55 programmable calculator for which he paid about five hundred dollars. I saw the same thing in Radio Shack the other day for $39.00. My first computer, an Ohio Scientific C-1-P in 1977 cost me a little under a thousand dollars. It had 4K (yes, 4096) bytes of memory, some of which was taken up by the BASIC stuff. My first Apple ][+ computer in 1979-80 cost me over a thousand dollars. It used its own flavor of Microsoft Basic which it called Applesoft Basic. It had 48K of memory but could be expanded to 64K with a 'language card' you installed in slot zero. Does anyone remember the Sinclair computer which you could purchase in a little box at any discount store for prices in the $29-49 range, as of about 1985? All you had to do was plug it into your television set to get the monitor. Maybe I am wrong on the schedule. I may be over optimistic, but I think the prices for very decent computers will drop outrageously low in the next few years. Of course there are potential problems for the manufacturers. Remember Commodore and the C-64 among their other products? That was a dandy little computer also, but that company is now out of business, bankrupt. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tsw@3do.com (Tom Watson) Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:17:35 -0700 Organization: The 3DO Corporation In article , bill@interactive.ns.ca (Bill McMullin) wrote: > Wouldn't it be great to solve the problems of the digital poor? I > agree with our Canadian friend who questions the high cost of memory. > How could anything produced in such mass quantity cost so much? If > they are trying to make use believe it is a commodity subject to > supply and demand, why isn't it traded on the stock market? (Maybe it > is, help me here.) > I would like a critique of this please ... > Everyone on the Net and all those in telecom are very much handicapped by > the high cost of RAM. We all have a need for memory and most always have a > need for *more*. If we had more at less cost we could likely be more > innovative with the products and services we create and also provide the > less than fortunate with access to computing power. While I can understand your complaint, but there are costs involved in producing memory modules. $40 (US) for a 1Mbyte simm (30 pin) may seem outlandish for you, but there is quite a lot that goes into one of the simms. In particular, there is a yield/testing curve. Memory is not produced that works 100% of the time, there are some flaws in the manufacturing process. The cost of memory includes the costs of the "rejects" wherever they come from. In other businesses parts can be "re-tooled" to correct defects, but RAM chips must be thrown out. All of this costs money. If you think that memory today is expensive, consider that just a few years ago, when 16k (16384) bit memories were $12.50 a chip, or $100 for 16k bytes (and at the time, it was considered "cheap", meaning you were HAPPY to pay the price). At that price a megabyte of memory would cost $6400., and you haven't paid for the support circuits. I for one am very happy that the prices are where they are now. Sure I wouldn't mind things being cheaper, but look at it this way, software is "mass produced" (after a tooling cost) and still sells for "exorbantant" prices (price a CAD package). If your argument holds, then we should get the software for the costs of the floppies (which are sold at the store for $25/100). Consider the following: If programs weren't so bloated, and programmers actually cared about how much memory things took, the demand wouldn't be as much (it would be there, I admit). Maybe we should get better programmers to write smaller, more compact programs!! Tom Watson tsw@3do.com (Home: tsw@johana.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very interesting point. I ran an entire bookeeping system -- not just one of those balance your checkbook pro- grams -- on my OSI C-1-P in the old days with 4K ram. I even ran an (admittedly!) very tiny BBS with it. They used to have me come down to the Lawson YMCA and give demonstrations with it and BASIC programming classes for beginniners. I would also take along my Apple ][+ and show off the art work I had created. These big splashy screen-filling displays in several colors always impressed them, and they assumed it took great gobs of memory. Then I would show them the code, which often as not was merely two, three or four lines long. I wrote this one little thing I named 'Fantasy on J.S. Bach' which was a cluster of several small squares which kept bumping into each other and exploding to make larger squares which would change colors, then gradually shrink into smaller boxes before repeating the process. POKEing the memory locations which controlled the speaker (which I had replaced with a larger amplified speaker) produced a crude rendition of the Tocatta and Fugue in D Minor. How did you get all that code in such a tiny amount of space they would ask. One day I was there when a fellow was also there who had written a book on 'Basic Programming Style' he was hawking. In a teasing way I answered that, 'the first thing you do is gather up all your books on Basic Programming Style and dump them all in the trash can. No REM statements for me! No indenting of IF/THEN/ELSE loops for easy readability! No single instruction per line; no siree! You pack that code in there! Cram as much as you can on one line. Just make sure you don't block yourself in on a line somewhere with an IF statement that it won't be able to get by. Cram! Shove! Push! Be creative with loops. Use only one or two 'union loops' for each time you need one instead of writing code repetitively. 'Go sub' and use the same code and loops, etc over and over again when possible. The man selling his book did not like me very much. But I thought I knew what I was doing. At least I thought so. Then one night I went to the weekly organ recital at the Chicago Temple Building downtown, to hear a performance of 'Pictures at an Exhibition' and the Franck 'Symphony in D Minor' both transcribed for organ. After 'Pictures' had been performed, they had a special surprise. A fellow brought a computer out onto the stage, turned it on, started it going, and walked off the stage. Everyone sat there with their jaw hanging open as the computer performed 'Pictures' from start to finish. I went home afterward higher than a kite, and I did not like me so much any more either. I realized how little I really knew about what would become so much a part of our lives over the next decade. What was exciting back then is very dull now. :( PAT] ------------------------------ From: brianb@cfer.com (Brian Brown) Subject: Re: The Road to a Real Cheap Info Appliance? Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 07:01:27 GMT Organization: ConferTech, international shoppa@altair.krl.caltech.edu (Tim Shoppa) wrote: > Sorry, I have to disagree here. Memory is *dirt cheap* these days. > Anyone who says otherwise wasn't buying memory two decades ago; my > first 4kbytes of RAM cost me $200 back then. $200 will buy you 6 > megabytes now, easily. For over five years now, memory has stayed within a few percent of the "40 bucks a meg" rule. All other components have fallen in price. For some reason, RAM is holding steadfast against the rising prices reflected in the commodity PC market. Just a few years ago, RAM was 40 bucks a meg, and Hard drives were about a buck a meg. Now, it's hard to buy a hard drive under 550MB. It is equally as hard to find a hard drive selling for over $550. Motherboards have fallen drastically, as have most peripherals and cards. > To get online doesn't require much memory, anyway. I'm writing this > on a DEC VT100 terminal; it has less than 4 kbytes of RAM in it. Good point - you can also drive a Yugo and live in a tent, but most people wouldn't be happy doing that. You are very fortunate in that you are happy with such a cheap system! --< futile attempt at market analysis deleted ("supply and demand")>-- The fact of the matter is, memory is a total commodity in PCs. With a few little-know exceptions, RAM is RAM. Nothing differentiates one maker from another. If you have some OLD memory, it might not work in your new PC. But your NEW memory, as long as it fits, will work in ANY PC. Memory makers can't distinguish themselves with prettier interfaces or better performance. Memory either works or it doesn't. And in almost every case, it does. To me, Simms in my computer are like fuses in my car. Without them, my car doesn't run right. I have to make sure I get the kind that fit, and are large enough for my car's needs. I don't care who makes the fuses. I rarely see them. I install them, and replace them if they blow. I would buy the cheapest fuses, but for the most part they are all priced the same. > Got a billion dollars or more? That's how much some of the new memory > factories cost these days. Every major manufacturer is building new > plants, as a matter of fact. I agree - building a factory is a silly idea. What's the answer? As more (modern) computers are obsoleted and junked, their memory will be re-used. I would expect to see a larger used Simms market open up eventually. As a rule, if memory doesn't go bad in the first month, it lasts forever. I have never had memory suddenly go bad after working for a long time. On the contrary, I would never buy a used hard drive because they have finite lifetimes. Memory does not. Maybe finite obsolescence time, but not lifetime. Plus, from a long term perspective, if memory stays at the same (~40/meg) rate (which it probably won't), it will eventually be a bargain. Sure, my grandfather bought a 6" TV set for $450 in 1948. But TVs hit the bottom about four years ago and are finally beginning to follow inflation. Memory and computer products will do the same. The steady state for computers isn't here yet, and won't be here for several more decades. Brian Brown ConferTech, International ------------------------------ From: relkay01@fiu.edu (Ronell Elkayam) Subject: Re: BellSouth's Caller ID Deluxe Date: 28 Nov 1995 01:03:41 GMT Organization: The People's Voice, 305-937-6468 On Mon, 20 Nov 95 15:21:00 EST, klein@snt.bellsouth.com (email: klein@snt.bellsouth.com) posted: > I would be happy to answer any questions (or find out the answers) > about the BellSouth Caller ID Deluxe service. Thanx for your willingness to help out! This will be highly appreciated! I've always wondered a few (heh) things about the Caller ID Deluxe service (in BellSouth) and perhaps now is a good time to ask these questions... I have logged over 17,000 Caller ID name&number entries while running my voice board. I've probably become the best beta tester for the slightly buggy service. I've seen some weird stuff... 1) Why are some entries not padded with spaces to fill the 15 character name field? (Most Name-Fields of names shorter than 15 are padded with spaces, so I assume this is the "normal" state) A few logged entries to illustrate this: ("_" means null) 94.12.16 17:31:46 (305) 888-5852 ABREU GLADYS___ 95.01.20 13:39:38 (305) 227-1715 ABURTO NIDIA___ 95.02.02 12:01:24 (305) 248-1212 AHRENS NEIL____ 94.11.22 14:45:24 (305) 636-4414 AMOR JOSE______ 94.09.07 21:16:40 (305) 383-2696 ANTHONY R______ 94.12.16 20:28:04 (305) 573-8619 BAEZ MIGUEL____ 94.11.24 09:48:23 (305) 220-3462 BAROC ANA______ 94.11.06 14:34:57 (305) 661-8720 ECKERD DRUGS___ 94.11.03 13:51:08 (305) 956-3458 FRENZI_________ 94.11.10 12:30:37 (305) 252-6493 GIBSON KEN_____ 95.01.31 14:56:17 (305) 443-6530 J P STUDIO_____ 94.12.04 18:44:25 (305) 654-8588 KEENAN SUMIR___ 94.05.16 12:47:06 (305) 371-3171 MIAMI HERALD___ 94.11.14 12:39:43 (305) 983-2902 SANTINI A______ 95.02.14 16:27:16 (305) 652-9541 SIMMS R L______ 94.11.06 14:27:09 (305) 432-1564 STUMPF M & S___ 94.11.22 03:24:13 (305) 949-2255 TAHITI MOTEL___ This even happens when there is an assumed logical continuation to the shortened name: (Subscriber's name is most likely OVER 15, yet is sent as smaller than 15 and is not padded with spaces) 94.05.25 09:13:19 (305) 577-0976 STEEL HECTOR &_ 94.05.25 10:09:00 (305) 577-0976 STEEL HECTOR &_ 94.10.12 11:56:09 (305) 577-0976 STEEL HECTOR &_ 95.01.19 13:20:18 (305) 577-0976 STEEL HECTOR &_ 95.01.17 22:10:18 (305) 940-1895 TORRES MINDY &_ 94.12.16 15:03:05 (305) 854-2468 DADE COUNTY OF_ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ == DADE, COUNTY OF? 94.11.22 10:41:42 (305) 575-5130 MIAMI CITY OF__ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ == MIAMI, CITY OF? To clarify: I never received the character "_" in the name field. I simply received "NAME" instead of "NAME ", so I logged it as "NAME___________" to make sure every name field is 15 chars long. 2. How come sometimes Name fields change back and forth between PADDED names, and those weird shorter-than-15 names??? (This is REALLY STRANGE) 95.01.21 17:24:41 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.21 17:34:05 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.21 17:47:11 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.21 17:56:17 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.21 18:52:05 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.21 19:44:29 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.22 13:40:38 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.22 15:22:08 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.22 20:30:31 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.25 14:03:59 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.28 18:24:57 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.01.28 18:36:39 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.01.28 18:47:21 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.01.29 11:51:12 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.01.29 22:51:05 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.01.30 21:10:56 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.31 09:03:36 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R 95.01.31 11:43:30 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.02.01 08:29:39 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.02.01 09:13:45 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ 95.02.03 23:27:37 (305) 256-1420 BUTLER R_______ Also, notice this person who has two phone lines at home, yet on one line the names are padded, on the other -- they're not...: 94.10.14 01:07:16 (305) 937-0052 LEVY GUY 94.10.14 01:40:04 (305) 937-0052 LEVY GUY 94.11.22 06:07:13 (305) 937-0052 LEVY GUY 94.10.14 00:58:22 (305) 933-0449 LEVY GUY_______ 94.11.21 00:42:29 (305) 933-0449 LEVY GUY_______ 3. What does "+" mean in the subscriber's name field? I've noticed it on a few entries, yet couldn't even speculate what they mean...: 94.09.08 17:50:55 (305) 554-9697 LOPEZ ALDO+ JR_ 94.09.09 15:50:09 (305) 554-9697 LOPEZ ALDO+ JR_ 94.09.10 18:56:31 (305) 554-9697 LOPEZ ALDO+ JR_ 94.10.12 11:06:09 (305) 666-3784 NEWMAN DAVID E+ 94.11.08 14:17:37 (305) 666-3784 NEWMAN DAVID E+ 94.11.21 15:27:21 (305) 255-6433 SCHONECK BEN K+ 94.12.16 17:23:10 (305) 442-1919 WALTER A P+ JR 4. Last thing... Out of 17,000 logged entries, one single name had the very strange characteristic of beginning with a space. Same number called several times, and all entries started in a space: 94.11.21 17:45:51 (305) 233-3059 TINNY J KEVIN And that's about it regarding my logged entries. Another Q: I'm talking to X on the phone. Y calls me. I hear the Call Waiting beep. I tell X, "goodbye" and I hang up. The phone immediately rings, and the Caller ID shows Y's phone number, but NEVER the name. (A message of "Name Unknown" is sent. This is sometimes displayed as "---------------" on the more primitive boxes, e.g. AT&T Display 85) Can this bug PLEASE be fixed? It's annoying as bloody hell. ;) Also: Why on earth is there a 15 character limit? My hardware can support much larger name fields than that... Why should I suffer if some Caller ID Box manufacturers can't figure out how to scroll name fields larger than their LCD can hold? (I'm assuming that's the reason...) Is this going to change anytime soon? > Michael Klein, BellSouth Telecommunications, klein@snt.bst.bls.com Thank you again, Michael. Oh, one last question before I run: When will Prestige finally work with Touchstar? I'd really want to use User Transfer ($3.30 Prestige service) with Caller ID Deluxe (a touchtone service). I was told they cannot work together. -- W/love, | Owner & Programmer: The People's Voice BBS @ 305-937-6468 | No pregnant women or heart-conditioned senior citizens are Ron | allowed. Under 42 must get parents' permission to call. Miami, FL | "THIS IS WHAT YOUR MOTHER ALWAYS WARNED YOU ABOUT" Don't bother to call... FCC disconnected the line on basis of board being "obscene". New number coming soon! Tapes avail. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #496 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 30 11:00:30 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA07475; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:00:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:00:30 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511301600.LAA07475@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #497 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Nov 95 11:00:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 497 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Spectrum Auctions (Winston E. Himsworth) Notice About CID Blocking in NYNEX Phone Bills (Garrett A. Wollman) Book Review: Growing and Maintaining a Successful BBS (Rob Slade) Scott Frye and Internet Fraud (Tad Cook) Octothorpe (The Answer) (Ralph Carlsen) Recent Bellcore NANPA IL's (Mark Cuccia) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Winston E. Himsworth Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 06:32:44 -0500 Subject: FCC Spectrum Auctions I have seen very little newsgroup information on the FCC's auction for PCS, MDS, and SMR spectrum. Do you know of a special newsgroup for this, or is there no interest? In case this group is interested, here are some anomalies we found from our experience in the current MDS (wireless cable) auction: Through three rounds of the FCC s MDS auction, we have been downloading files for use with our associated off-line bidding tools software. The downloads have been made two ways directly from the FCC s on-line bidding package using the Round Results Viewer and, most recently, from the auction files posted on the Internet. Surprisingly, the file information is not consistent. Somewhat disconcertingly, the Internet files appear to be correct and/or more usable. The FCC s Round Results files for which we purchased FCC software and are paying on-line connect time to view contain significant errors and/or omissions. The minimum bid file, as posted on the Internet, contains a record for each of the 493 BTAs. The same information, as downloaded from the FCC software, contains records only for those BTAs on which a new high bid was made in that round. Without reference to the historical data, therefore, the FCC s file would be incomplete if we attempt to use it to structure bid submissions off-line for the next round. It should also be noted that the two minimum bid files are sorted in different orders the FCC file is provided in numerical order BTA order (albeit with missing BTAs), whereas the Internet file is sorted by POP-ranked BTAs within POP-ranked MTAs. The FCC s withdrawal data is out-of-synch by round number. The Internet files show one withdrawal in each of the first three rounds. The correct withdrawals are shown in the correctly labeled round files, although the data item showing the round number is wrong for the second and third round files. The latter mistake matches the FCC s files which also show the same three withdrawals and list the first two as occurring in round one and the third as occurring in round two; no withdrawal report was available for round three. We alerted the FCC s technical support team to the minimum bid problem yesterday and will point out the withdrawal problem today. Hopefully these problems can get resolved for later MDS rounds and in time for the start of the SMR and PCS auctions. Until then we will use the Internet downloads to feed our off-line bidding tools. We plan to run a test later today to determine what time penalty, if any, we will incur by waiting for round results to be posted on the Internet rather than taking them directly from the FCC software. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the more detailed report on this. We have covered those auctions here in the past, but not in a great deal of detail. I doubt that many of us have the money needed to get involved in any serious way. ... another of our regular readers posts the auction results from time to time also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wollman@ginger.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett A. Wollman) Subject: Notice About CID Blocking in NYNEX Phone Bills Date: 29 Nov 1995 16:38:19 GMT Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science I received the following notice in my phone bill yesterday: NOTICE FOR CUSTOMERS WITH LINE BLOCKING New Line Blocking Code, *82, Goes into Effect on December 1, 1995 NYNEX Caller ID Service allows a subscriber to see the telephone number of an incoming call on a special display device before answering the call. Line Blocking automatically prevents the display of your telephone number on all calls to Caller ID subscribers. Starting December 1, 1995, Line Blocking can be deactivated on a call-by-call basis, by pressing *82 (dial 1182 on a rotary or dial pulse phone) before making a call. Until December 1, 1995, continue to use *67 to deactivate Line Blocking on a call-by-call basis (dial 1167 on rotary or dial pulse phones). [Ordering info deleted.] To verify that the Line Blocking option has been activated and is working on your number(s), call the automated Line Blocking test number. Customers in the 413 area code should call 1 413 447-8214. Those customers in the 617/508 area code should call 1 617 380-2018 (both numbers are toll free), 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This call must be made from the number you want verified. Garrett A. Wollman wollman@lcs.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:38:17 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Growing and Maintaining a Successful BBS" by Bryant BKGAMASB.RVW 951104 "Growing and Maintaining a Successful BBS", Alan D. Bryant, 1995, 0-201-48380-7, U$39.95/C$55.00 %A Alan D. Bryant adb@bryant.com %C 1 Jacob Way, Reading, MA 01867-9984 %D 1995 %G 0-201-48380-7 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. %O U$39.95/C$55.00 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 Fax: 617-944-7273 %O 800-822-6339 617-944-3700 markj@aw.com bkexpress@aw.com %P 325 %T "Growing and Maintaining a Successful BBS" This volume (following an earlier beginner's guide) is obviously aimed at sysops who have been operating a board for some time. Therefore the material, probably legitimately, assumes a greater level of technical sophistication, and a desire to move into a commercial, or at least self-supporting, operation. The business advice is practical and important. For small business operators it is probably unsurprising, covering the value of listening to your customers, business plans, positioning and marketing. Three chapters look at the addition of Internet service on a BBS. In the technical area, Bryant again provides some very interesting and potentially useful material. He may, however, have confused two possible markets. For those interested in commercializing systems, much of the technical side of the book is too esoteric. The keeners and hobbyists who want to get into the details of routers and domain name servers are not likely to be thrilled by the thought of marketing strategies. Amateurs who are interested in code tables probably have them, so I suspect that the real market for the book lies in the business areas. The book could, therefore, use more explanation, and fewer network topology diagrams. Overall, a useful guide for the experienced sysop seeking new levels of operation and service. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKGAMASB.RVW 951104. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca DECUS Symposium '96, Vancouver, BC, Feb 26-Mar 1, 1996, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: Scott Frye and Internet Fraud Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:31:32 PST Internet Fraud Hard to Police By Dan Rutherford, Tulsa World, Okla. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Nov. 28 -- It's been called the information superhighway, but anonymity, deception and stealth make it sometimes appear to be an information back alley, rife with rip-off artists. The perpetrators park for a day or two on Usenet News -- a worldwide bulletin board shared by more than 15,000 user groups -- or other net pages offering tips on "hot stocks," financial advice, even pyramid schemes to millions of Internet users. And, while gigabytes of messages enter and exit the Internet daily, only a handful of securities regulators are able to monitor the traffic on a regular basis. The Securities and Exchange Commission has taken action on only three suspected Internet scams. The latest was taken against a 27-year-old Pennsylvania man promising risk-free profits and above-average returns on investments in two Costa Rican enterprises. U.S. District Court in New York issued a preliminary injunction Nov. 15 against the solicitor, Scott A. Frye, after the SEC filed its complaint Oct. 27. Ellen Hersh, assistant director of the commission's Northeast regional office, said investigators were alerted to suspected fraud only after noticing a cease and desist order issued in Kansas, where regulators noticed Frye's offer after an inquiry from a would-be investor. Irving Faught, administrator of the Oklahoma Securities Commission, said, "We are definitely concerned about it. The difficulty with it is not only the difficulty in policing potential scams ... but that this information goes out to a lot of people who may not know what they're doing when it comes to making investments." Although he wouldn't give specific numbers, Faught said Oklahoma regulators are seeking action against fewer than five suspects for unregistered securities sales and solicitation of suspicious investment advisor services. Faught said his office, like his Kansas counterparts, cannot afford to monitor the millions of messages appearing on the Internet daily. He relies on investors calling his office to check out a too-good-to-be-true deal. That's why, he said, investor education is the key to stopping Internet scams. Nancy Smith, the SEC's director of investor assistance, agrees. "People often let their guards down when they see an offer on their computers," she said. "They think, 'Well, this wouldn't be advertising on the Internet if it weren't legitimate."' But that is not the case. According to Leonard Conn, president of Internet Oklahoma Services, if a user refuses to comply with the Internet provider's rules, there is little they can do about it. "We pretty much take the same position as the telephone company does. We do not knowingly let people use the system in a criminal manner, but it's just not feasible for us to monitor every user," he said. Therefore, said Smith, it's up to the individual. "What people forget when they're on the Internet is they're dealing with strangers. Would you give $1,000, $2,000 or $5,000 to an absolute stranger? Would you buy a car over the Internet?" Just like buying a car, she said, an investment should be checked out thoroughly and considered carefully. If a deal sounds too good to be true, she said, it probably is. Don't let greed override common sense, she added. If you think an Internet offer is suspicious, contact the Oklahoma commission or the SEC. They could tell you if it's legitimate. And, if it's not, they may be able to stop others from being taken advantage of. Tom Newkirk, the SEC's enforcement division associate director, would not say how much time regulators spend monitoring the Internet -- only that it is being monitored. And, "a bunch" of investigations are in progress. Hersh said Internet watching is split with minding other media newspapers, magazines, radio and television -- for potential securities scams. "There are a lot of investment boards and news groups out there, he said. "We look at representative samplings of these things ... and pursue if it looks worthwhile. "We believe by prosecuting a few high-profile cases we can send out the message that we are monitoring the Internet and, if it's out there, that we stand a good chance of finding it." For More Information: The Securities and Exchange Commission has published two Invest Wisely brochures. The first deals with how to invest in mutual funds, and the second offers advice for consumers on securities purchases. To get a copy of the brochures call (800) 732-0330, leave your name and address and the free brochures will be mailed to you. Complaints or Inquiries: If you would like more information on a potential stock purchase or would like to report a suspicious securities offering you can contact the Securities and Exchange Commission at (800) 732-0330 or (202) 942-7040; or the Oklahoma Department of Securities at (405) 235-0230. ------------------------------ From: carlsen@hotair.att.com (Ralph Carlsen) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:21:55 -0500 Subject: Octothorpe (The Answer) Pat, The following explains where "octothorpe" really came from. I am sending this to you because, as you will see, there are very few people who could know this story. The reason I am writing at this time is because I volunteered for the AT&T Lay Off package after 34 years of service at Bell Labs so I may not be around much longer. During the past year I have enjoyed reading your news group, and I have used your archives a couple of times (once to get "octothorpe"). Your comments and notes on the postings suggest you and I would agree on lots of things related to our telecom industry. Ralph Carlsen THE REAL SOURCE OF THE WORD "OCTOTHORPE" First, where did the symbols * and # come from? In about 1961 when DTMF dials were still in development, two Bell Labs guys in data communications engineering (Link Rice and Jack Soderberg) toured the USA talking to people who were thinking about telephone access to computers. They asked about possible applications, and what symbols should be used on two keys that would be used exclusively for data applications. The primary result was that the symbols should be something available on all standard typewriter keyboards. The * and # were selected as a result of this study, and people did not expect to use those keys for voice services. The Bell System in those days did not look internationally to see if this was a good choice for foreign countries. Then in the early 1960s Bell Labs developed the 101 ESS which was the first stored program controlled switching system (it was a PBX). One of the first installations was at the Mayo Clinic. This PBX had lots of modern features (Call Forwarding, Speed Calling, Directed Call Pickup, etc.), some of which were activated by using the # sign. A Bell Labs supervisor DON MACPHERSON went to the Mayo Clinic just before cut over to train the doctors and staff on how to use the new features on this state of the art switching system. During one of his lectures he felt the need to come up with a word to describe the # symbol. Don also liked to add humor to his work. His thought process which took place while at the Mayo Clinic doing lectures was as follows: - There are eight points on the symbol so "OCTO" should be part of the name. - We need a few more letters or another syllable to make a noun, so what should that be? (Don MacPherson at this point in his life was active in a group that was trying to get JIM THORPE's Olympic medals returned from Sweden) The phrase THORPE would be unique, and people would not suspect he was making the word up if he called it an "OCTOTHORPE". So Don Macpherson began using the term Octothorpe to describe the # symbol in his lectures. When he returned to Bell Labs in Holmdel NJ, he told us what he had done, and began using the term Octothorpe in memos and letters. The term was picked up by other Bell Labs people and used mostly for the fun of it. Some of the documents which used the term Octothorpe found their way to Bell Operating Companies and other public places. Over the years, Don and I have enjoyed seeing the term Octothorpe appear in documents from many different sources. Don MacPherson retired about eight years ago, and I will be retiring in about six weeks. Ralph Carlsen These are, of course, my remembrances and are not any official statement of AT&T or the subsequent 3 companies. [TELECOM Dgiest Editor's note: Thank you very much for sharing. This is indeed an interesting report. Do you think you could get Don MacPherson to join us here among the Digest readership? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Recent Bellcore NANPA IL's Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 00:21:00 CST In some recent mail (Mon. 27 Nov. 1995), I received a mailing from Bellcore's NANPA (North American Numbering Plan Administration) with *seven* IL's (Information Letters) all dated 17 Nov. 1995. IL-95/11-003 stated that NYNEX advises NANPA that the 617 NPA (eastern Massachusetts) is in a `jeopardy' situation, but it didn't give indication of any date of a new areacode, nor the code, nor indication of whether there would be a split or an overlay. IL-95/11-004 gives the test number for the new northwestern South Carolina areacode 864. The test number is 864-242-0070 and will be discontinued on 1 June 1996. A map of South Carolina showing the boundary line between the old 803 NPA and new 864 NPA as well as a list of current 803-NXX codes which will be transferred to the 864 NPA is also included. IL-95/11-005 gives some further info to an earlier IL (95/10-007) where there were correspondences between Bellcore NANPA & the FCC, regarding Carrier Codes (10-XXX/101-XXXX). There *is* mention that Numbering Plan info is now available on Bellcore's webpage http://www.bellcore.com and then click under `Consulting and Engineering', but the remainder of the URL to go *directly* to NANPA (http://www.bellcore.com/NANP) info is not indicated. IL-95/11-006 mentions the changes in end-of-permissive-dialing regarding the southeastern Florida split (954 from 305). End of Permissive Dialing for: Paging providers is moved up from 13 Apr. 1996 to 1 Mar. 1996 Wireline (POTS) is moved back from 1 June 1996 to 1 Aug. 1996 Cellular providers remains the same (1 Jan. 1997) IL-95/11-007 mentions that the INC (Industry Numbering Committee), a standing committe of the ICCF (Industry Carrier's Compatability Forum), sponsored by the ATIS (Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions) has its workshop developing future plans for expansion to NANP numbers of greater than ten-digits, and that NANPA and the INC will keep the telecommunications industry well informed of any plans or changes, so that individual carriers can handle future network technical planning, etc. The IL does mention that the recent change to include NNX (interchangeable) format NPA areacodes had been planned for *over 30 years*! IL-95/11-008 states that NPA 216 (northeastern Ohio) will split off into a smaller 216 (greater Cleveland area) and a new NPA 330. The test number will be 330-783-2330 and start on 6 Jan. 1996. Permissive dialing will begin on Sat. 9 March 1996 and will end for wireline customers on Sat 29 June 1996, and end for cellular/wireless customers on 1 July 1999. A map and a list of switchnames with associated central office (NXX) codes for both areacodes is enclosed. AND NOW- the BEST for LAST (IMHO)- IL-95/11-009- THE BAHAMAS GETS ITS OWN AREACODE!!!! Permissive dialing will begin on Tues. 1 Oct. 1996 and will end on Mon. 31 March 1997. The new areacode will be 242. All Central Office Codes (NXX's) for the Bahamas presently in 809 will be transferred intact to 242, and after permissive dialing ends, those codes will become part of the assignment pool in 809. This is similar to the Bermuda (441) situation. Test numbers will be 242-352-0000, 242-356-0000, 242-393-0000 and will become operational on 1 July 1996. Also, the Bahamas will become responsible for assignment of future central office codes in their own 242 areacode. Presently, 809 central office code assignments is administered by Bellcore's NANPA. I think that Bermuda will also be responsible for its own c/o code assignments in its own 441 areacode. A map of the Bahamas is also included in this IL, as well as a list of the 3XX central office codes assigned to the Bahamas which will be moving to NPA 242, along with the island(s) of the Bahamas the code is assigned to. An interesting note about the Bahamas -- there is only *one* N0X form code within the Bahamas, namely 302 for New Providence Island. There are no 3N0 codes identified on this list as the Bahamas. There are *no* 31X nor 38X codes for the Bahamas on this list, neither. I also don't think that the 3XX series in 809 is exclusively for the Bahamas anymore. And years back, most of automated/dialable Bahamas had *five* digit local dialing. Back then, there were *no* NN1 codes used, since the initial `1' was for either toll access or service codes. Presently, I think they use 91X codes for service codes, but all local numbers are dialed on a full seven-digit basis, all 'home' NPA toll is dialed 1+809+seven-digits (soon to be 1+242+seven-digits), with all foreign NPA toll dialed 1+ten-digits. 0+ type calls are also dialed with ten digits after the 0+ access code. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #497 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 30 16:11:47 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA11345; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:11:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:11:47 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199511302111.QAA11345@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #498 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Nov 95 12:48:14 EST Volume 15 : Issue 498 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "On the Road" by Prochak (Rob Slade) Sending Files via FAX (Stephen Primost) Campus-Wide Cable (Fiber) Plant White Papers Wanted (John Brassil) Help Wanted With Panasonic KX-T4300 (Jurgen Morhofer) 12 and 16 kHz "Billing" Tones in Europe (Dave LeVasseur) Nationwide Cellular Plans (Clark R. Wilkins) CNID in 314/Call Blocking (Timothy Brown) Need Satcomm Help (James E. Diskin) Interstate Caller ID -- Almost? (Chris J. Cartwright) What PBX Switches Support Data/Voice Separation? (A. Padgett Peterson) 800 Number Density (Jonathan Edelson) Citibank Screen Phone Pilot (Robert D. Morse) PCS Service of Sprint (Soonam Kahng) Interstate Telecom Owners (Adam S. Wertheimer) Research Student Wanted (Alan O'Callaghan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:22:56 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "On the Road" by Prochak BKONROAD.RVW 951106 "On the Road", Michael Prochak, 1995, 0-201-59396-1, U$19.95/C$25.95 %A Michael Prochak michael@cix.compulink.uk 74431.1153@compuserve.com %C 1 Jacob Way, Reading, MA 01867-9984 %D 1995 %G 0-201-59396-1 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. %O U$19.95/C$25.95 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 Fax: (617) 944-7273 %O markj@aw.com 800-822-6339 617-944-3700 bkexpress@aw.com %P 272 %T "On the Road" About half of the book is a listing and description of the Apple PowerBook and Newton lines of portable computers, and related accessories, peripherals and software. (A chapter lists vendors and products: it would have been a bit more helpful had contact information not been limited to telephone numbers.) The remainder is mostly segues drawn from the author's (and some others) experiences on the road, but there are very useful chapters covering maintenance, repairs, handy tools and the vagaries of hotel telephone jacks. The material is not technical. There is also more than a bit of bias. (Prochak's paean of praise to Newton, which even Apple now admits was not fully thought out, is ruined by his admission that although he has one he never uses it.) And the section on the Internet clearly shows that while Prochak may be on it, he is definitely not of it. Still, this book serves very handily as an introduction and buyer's guide to Apple's portable computing products. Powerbook users, as well as newcomers, will likely find worthwhile tips for more effective and trouble-free computing. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKONROAD.RVW 951106. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. ROBERTS@decus.ca Rob_Slade@mindlink.bc.ca RSlade@cyberstore.ca "No passion in the world is equal to the passion to alter someone else's draft" - H. G Wells Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94311-0/3-540-94311-0 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 12:03 EST From: Stephen Primost <0007466483@mcimail.com> Subject: Sending Files via FAX Has anyone heard of this? What company makes this unit and is it really worth the price of admission? The disc fax facility is a very fast means of transmitting the complete contents of a floppy disc. The disc is inserted into the unit, and at the other end is a similar unit -- the data is sent into a hard disc in this unit and can be transferred via floppy onto PC. We have some data on the equipment but are trying to establish what other companies do. I asked why this was necessary in view of the internet facility to import files and was advised that it was for speed of data transfer (eg for many files on a floppy), and greater security. Having used Internet I think the speed thing is probably correct but is it worth a separate capital outlay particularly when you need to rely on other users having the facility? If you have any further comments please let me know. ------------------------------ From: John Brassil Subject: Campus-Wide Cable (Fiber) Plant White Papers Wanted Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:21:54 -0800 Organization: Vanderbilt University We're looking for relatively bias-free studies/recommendations on what kind and how many strands of fiber to pull for the enhancements we are planning for our network here at Vandy. We're looking at a distributed star of ten "core" buildings tied together and supporting seven or eight buildings each. There might be a ring among the core buildings as well. We want to be able to support voice, data and video over the same infrastructure, but we have no real firm idea of what kind of mix to expect, especially in the out-years. This will have to last us well into the next century, so we want to be as robust as possible. If anyone has any pointers, suggestions, or other comments, please e-mail them to me and I will summarize and forward them to the groups. Thanks, John J. Brassil | brassil@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu | 615.322.2496 ------------------------------ From: jurgen@flashnet.it (Jurgen Morhofer) Subject: Help Wanted With Panasonic KX-T4300 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:48:24 GMT Organization: GlobalTel Reply-To: jurgen@flashnet.it To all you techies out there, please help! I live in Italy and would like to get the call-waiting-service to work with my Panasonic cordless phone. The problem it won't work is that all Panasonic phones produce a too long interruption for Italian Telecom requirements, if you press the FLASH key. (They probably want to sell their own phones! :-)) With a regular phone you can avoid this by hitting the hookswitch very fast, but a cordless phone does not have a hookswitch. I just opened my phone and noticed ten different trimmers in it, labeled T1 through T11, with T10 missing. I really hope that one of these trimmers determines the time of interuption by the Flash key, but I have no idea which one and I don't think it's a good idea to try them all ... The exact name of my phone is KX-T4300H written at the base unit and KX-T4300R / PQUQ1033ZD-a written on the inside on the PCB of my handset. Please reply via e-mail as my providers newsserver works really bad. Thank you very much, Jurgen jurgen@flashnet.it ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 13:22:55 CST From: Dave LeVasseur Subject: 12 and 16 kHz "Billing" Tones in Europe In Telecom Digest issue 491, Masoud Loghmani wrote: > Does anyone know of any international standard that defines the 12Khz > and 16Khz charging signals for pay-phones? I specifically need > information like duration, amplitude, and phase shifts (if any). The tones to which you refer are used to provide billing information in real time to subscribers in many countries. This service never caught on here in North America, probably since much of our calling is "local" or non-toll. The service is not restricted to pay-phones and is reportedly available, like it or not, on all ALL phone lines in Germany, sometimes to the dismay of modem users there. (Special filters may be required to prevent the tones from interfering with modem signals.) Early metering tone detectors used vibrating reeds that resonated at the appropriate tone frequency. The reeds would trip an "odometer" that displayed the cost of the current call. All-electronic equivalents are the norm today. The tones are sent as a function of the rate at which the call is billed. More pulses per minute means a more expensive call. The two most common tone frequencies are 12 and 16 kHz. Great Britain uses a 50 Hz common-mode signal, as do a few other countries. Each country seems to have its own standard for pulse width, frequency tolerance and pulse shape, though there are many characteristics in common. Here is a partial list of countries using 12 kHz tones: Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Spain, France, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey and Australia. The 16 kHz tone is used in: Belgium, Germany, Greece, Israel, Norway, Finland, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. You might call Aptek Williams, Deerfield Beach, FL (305.421.8450 or 800-423-8450) regarding your request. They make a module, part number AMS 3089, that they state "meets all European standards" for the decoding of 12 or 16 kHz metering pulses. Dave LeVasseur | Internet: dlevasseur@midcom.anza.com Advanced Product Development Mgr. | Telephone: +1 (605) 882-0339 (direct) Midcom, Inc. | Front Desk:+1 (605) 886-4385 121 Airport Drive / P.O. Box 1330 | Toll-free: (800) 643-2661 US & Canada Watertown, SD 57201 USA | Fax: +1 (605) 886-3791 Amateur Radio: N0DL | BBS: +1 (605) 882-0349 14.4-8-n-1 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 08:51:17 CST From: clarkw@sam.neosoft.com (Clark R. Wilkins) Subject: Nationwide Cellular Plans I am submitting this request on behalf of a friend who is not (and probably never will be) on the Net: Said friend is in a service business that requires him to travel constantly across the continental United States. Since he is technically a nomad, the "semi" he drives in constitutes his office. He keeps a business number at his home base in Wyoming and has his calls forwarded to a U.S. West cellular account using roaming. Since he is on the road 60-65% of the time, he is concerned with any options such as roaming or national cellular accounts that will help him reduce expenses. Any help will be greatly appreciated as this is a startup business, and expenses are very much an issue. Clark R. Wilkins ------------------------------ From: tb@Walden.MO.NET (Timothy Brown) Subject: CNID in 314/Call Blocking Date: 30 Nov 1995 03:13:38 GMT Organization: -=MO.NET=- P-Net, Inc's Missouri Operations Quick question. I have CNID on one of my lines here in 314 (St. Louis, MO, served by Southwestern Bell). Recently, I got a "courtesy call" and the number showed up without a hitch. It was from out of state (916? 917?), but local numbers from not-so-distant locales (suburbs) are listed as out of area. Even worse, an SWB Operator I talked to said that, given that I had the number of the party I wished to block, I couldn't do so, because "their area doesn't have that service yet." Asking her why I can't do it even if I have the service, she didn't have an answer. Bell's CNID/Blocking service is actually pretty pathetic in this area. Can anybody offer me some explanations as to why this is so, or even similar horror (or success, if they exist) stories on this? Timothy Brown [tb@mo.net] http://walden.mo.net/~tb/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the operator was wrong on this. If you can see a number on your caller ID display (or the word 'private') then you can deal with the number like any other. I have experimented with blocking out numbers from all over the USA. Time and again, if they were displayed on my Caller-ID box I could do it. In fact, a way to find out if an area has SS7 is to try and block a number in that area. Pick an area code and number at random. Use whatever the code is to screen calls from that number from reaching you. Try it. Note that sometimes it takes a *long time* -- i.e. twenty seconds to respond back to you. Your central office has to inquire of the other central office about this. In some ways it is sort of like sending a 'ping' between computers. I've tried random blocking of numbers in various parts of the country. Now and then the respnse comes back that I cannot block the number. Sometimes the response comes back quickly saying that the number has been added to my call screening list. A response I find interesting is one that comes back occassionally saying, "The number cannot be added *right now* -- try again in a few minutes." I am not sure, but I think this means your central office tried to get a response from the other end but timed out waiting for a reply. From all over the 312/708 area response to a request to screen out a number is immediate. Either you can, or you cannot, and usually you can. One peculiar excpetion however is certain numbers in 312-855. I have tried adding some of those numbers to my call screening list and no matter when I try or how often, the response is always, 'cannot add right now, try again in a few minutes'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jimdiski@wam.umd.edu (James E. Diskin) Subject: Need Satcomm Help Date: 30 Nov 1995 12:48:40 GMT Organization: University of Maryland, College Park Hi folks, I am a stupid lowly grad student taking a course in Satellite Communications. I need to define a commercial application. I have chosen video-teleconferencing. I am looking for people with experience with commercial satellite communications systems to correspond with. I have studied a lot, and can actually ask some halfway intelligent questions. Are you familiar with link budgets, EIRPs, PFDs, TASO, the Crane model, etc? A couple of specific questions that come to mind at the moment are: 1. Do you know of a specific comm satellite that would be appropriate for a videoconferencing link? What is the longitude of the satellite? What company operates it? Do you know who I might contact to get some specific satellite parameters, such as the number and type of channels available, EIRP, etc.? 2. Do you know of any good publications that have specific information about communications satellites, such as their dates of launch, uses, coverage maps, etc.? Please email me at jimdiski@wam.umd.edu Sincere thanks to anyone who may take the time to respond, and thank you all for your time. Jim Diskin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:00:25 EST From: Chris J. Cartwright Subject: Interstate Caller ID -- Almost? Just an observation that maybe someone can explain. I live in MD 301-990 and two of my children live in PA 717-545 with their mother. For the past two years calls from either of their lines have come through as OUT-OF-AREA on the CID box. As of the beginning of November their mother had the number changed (still 717-545) and set-up as unlisted. Now the calls come through as PRIVATE. Calls from the other line (unchanged) still come through as OUT-OF-AREA. As the only PRIVATE calls I get now are from my kids, or the occasional Fire/Police/Ambulance benvolent associations, I can be reasonably sure that the PRIVATE calls are from one of them, or at least from their house. Besides the fact that this defeats the intended purpose of hiding the callers identity, (granted it's a specific example), why can't I get numbers other than ones in the 202, 301, 410, and 703 areas codes? I know that nationwide CID is supposed to be in operation 12/1/95 (with a little luck) but why would they be able to pass information that the number is PRIVATE but not the number itself? Are telco's mandated not to pass the ID before December 1st or am I just getting odd results since 301 and 717 are adjoining area codes? Thanks, Christopher Cartwright, Tech. Engineer Mail dsc3cjc@imc220.med.navy.mil ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 10:14:06 EST From: A. Padgett Peterson Subject: What PBX Switches Support Data/Voice Separation? It is my understanding that (C)LASS capable switches have the ability to discriminate between voice and data (modem/FAX) traffic and to allow voice while blocking data traffic to specific extensions or blocks. 1) What is this capability called? (telco lingo) 2) What switches support this (manufacturer/models - think 5ESS is one) 3) Do I have the terms right? Customer Local Area Switching Services Switching Service Seven (SS7) If you send to me offline (padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com) I will summarize for the list. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:21:27 PST From: Jonathan Edelson Subject: 800 Number Density I have a question/suggestion about the move to 888 toll free numbers. I am in a situation where a business 800 number is routed to a home phone, so that business calls can be answered in the evenings. A really annoying problem with the 800 service is _wrong numbers_, far more frequent wrong numbers than one gets with regular service. One aspect of this is that the single '800' area code applies to the entire US, so you end up with many people calling 800 numbers. A second problem is that people seem less worried about getting the number right when they are not paying the bill. (In our case, there was a collection agency in the 801 area code that shared the last seven digits with our 800 number ... arrrrgh.) The final problem seems to be the 'density' of the numbers used; miss one digit and you end up getting someone else. It would seem that the solution would be to offer 1-888-xxx-xxx-xxxx numbers, along with a requirement that the number space be kept sparse, meaning, say, that only one in 100 numbers get used. This would mean that mis-dialed numbers would end up getting an error message (usually), that simply randomly trying numbers would not be productive, and that there would be no overlap between the 801 area code and the toll free area code. If the 888 numbers were offered with features of the numbers themselves that made them attractive for people, then folk would start switching of their own accord. I for one would find a sparse number space attractive, meaning 888 even if 888 is implemented with conventional numbering (simply because there would be fewer folk there) I understand that there are services which put a pass code on one's 800 number, so that you don't get disturbed by wrong numbers. However the ones that I have seen seemed a touch expensive. Anyhow, simply an idea that I thought I would pass along. Jon ------------------------------ From: rmorse@qds.com (Robert D. Morse) Subject: Citibank Screen Phone Pilot Date: 30 Nov 1995 13:52:18 GMT Organization: Quantitative Data Systems, Inc. Does anyone have any information on Citibank's screen phone banking application in New York? I know that they are using the Philips P100-A screen phone but little else. I would like to know: 1. How successful the project is; 2. Number of users (I've heard around 6000-8000); 3. Features of the service; 4. How it fares with their PC based service. Either post or send e-mail to rmorse@qds.com Thanks! ------------------------------ From: soonam@isse.gmu.edu (Soonam Kahng) Subject: PCS Service of Sprint Date: 30 Nov 1995 11:17:11 GMT Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA Hello, Today, I went to a local electronics shop (Best Buy) and saw about Sprint Spectrum (Personal Communication System) Is this service what we call PCS? The salesman told me it only covers DC and Baltimore area. There are two models of phone (from Ericsson CH337 $99 with rebate) and from NOKIA2190 $199). The lowest service rate is $15 includes answering machine, Caller ID and Paging services. It sounds very good to me. But before I start, I would like to hear from you about the pros and cons of this service. Are other phone companies offering this service? In case of Sprint service, the only disadvantage is the service doesn't cover wide area like nomal cell service. It seems to be no roaming service. The salesman told me the service is only available DC area now. Any information is welcome please. Thank you. soonam@isse.gmu.edu ------------------------------ From: werthe@cooper.edu (Adam S. Wertheimer) Subject: Interstate Telecom Fiber Owners Date: 30 Nov 1995 00:19:11 -0500 Organization: The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art I was wondering what companies own fiber or other interstate links. The big telephone companies come to mind first i.e. ATT, Sprint, and MCI. What about MFS communications and Metro Fiber? The telephone wholesalers make this question so complicated. I would like to make a list if the number of companies are as small as I guessed, but I may be surprised. Adam Wertheimer ------------------------------ From: Alan O'Callaghan <100303.2324@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Research Student Wanted Date: 30 Nov 1995 15:04:06 GMT Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736) Object Modelling and Migration RESEARCH STUDENTSHIP BURSARY (9000 pounds sterling + EC fees) A bursary is offered for a research student with a First or Upper Second Class honours degree in a computing subject, who has strong skills in object-oriented construction and, preferably, some knowledge of OO analysis and design models and computer networks. The successful candidate will work in an exciting new project, funded by BT, involving collaboration between the University's Object Technology Group (OTG) and BT laboratories investigating the possible usefulness of patterns or micro-architectures in existing large-scale systems in developing pathways for their incremental migration to Object Technology. The bursary, initially for one year, is designed to support a candidate working most of their time in Ipswich in a BT software development environment, but also partly with the OTG at Leicester. The successful applicant will be expected to register for a Ph.D. Applicants should send full CVs to: Professor Derek Teather, Head of Research Unit, School of Computing Sciences, De Montfort University, LEICESTER, LE1 9BH, UK by December 15th 1995 at the very latest, with a view to a start in January 1996. Informal inquiries may be made either to the Project Manager, Alan O'Callaghan (+44 116 2551551 x8503) or to Ray Farmer (+44 116 2577 7495) or by e-mail to any of the following addresses: aoc@dmu.ac.uk, 100303.2324@compuserve.com, or rwf@dmu.ac.uk A. J. O'Callaghan Chair, Object Technology Group, DMU. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #498 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 30 19:55:54 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id TAA28755; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 19:55:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 19:55:54 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199512010055.TAA28755@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #499 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Nov 95 19:56:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 499 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada Petitions Canadian Government (Terry Flanagan) Bell Canada Asks to Overturn CRTC Decision (Nigel Allen) Microsoft Network Offers Enhanced World Wide Web Site (Bella Assaria) Maximum Throughput Over Phone Line (Rick Whiting) Roadside Call Box Mismanagement (Keith Jarett) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Terry Flanagan Subject: Bell Canada Petitions Canadian Government Organization: Bell Canada Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 20:02:31 GMT In a petition filed November 30, 1995, with the federal Cabinet, Bell Canada has requested an overhaul of regulatory rules that are hobbling the company's ability to compete and providing an unfair advantage to foreign-backed competitors. "What is at stake here is a viable, Canadian-based telecommunications industry that can generate jobs, investment, R&D and economic growth for Canada," said John McLennan, Bell's President and Chief Executive Officer. The Bell petition specifically asks the government to repeal that part of the recent ruling by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (Decision 95-21, October 31) requiring that Bell's long distance rates be reduced to fully offset the revenue generated by the local rate increases ordered by the CRTC. "We are making this request because the mandated further reduction of long distance rates is based on faulty principle, is being inequitably applied, and is patently unnecessary to bring about lower long distance rates for our customers," McLennan said. The CRTC has a duty to allow just and reasonable rates and that standard has not been respected. The basic purpose of CRTC Decision 95-21 is to divide the telephone business into a "competitive" segment -- primarily local service -- where traditional rate of return regulation continues to apply. But by mandating specific long distance toll decreases, the CRTC is in fact not allowing market forces to determine outcomes in the competitive segment. This is blatantly inconsistent with its own principle. "The CRTC is telling us what prices we're allowed to charge in an intensely competitive business, but has ignored the regulatory standard of a reasonable rate of return. We're left with the worst of both worlds and that's fundamentally unfair," McLennan said. Moreover, the CRTC's decision is inequitable. The mandated long distance price cuts apply to Bell Canada but not to its competitors. Companies like Sprint and AT&T-backed Unitel, which are affiliated with US giants, already enjoy a host of regulatory advantages. Now they will be allowed to further reduce the contributions they are required to make in support of low local rates, but without any requirement to cut their long distance prices. The long distance price cuts which Bell is being ordered to make are already taking place. "Average long distance prices have been cut in half since 1986. They are now about equal to US rates, while our local rates are roughly half those in the United States. In the last year alone, Bell's customers -- mostly in the residential and small business markets -- have benefited from price reductions of $200 million on long distance," McLennan said. "Clearly, the competitive marketplace is working for our customers. "However, if the government fails to take the steps we are requesting, it is the customer who will ultimately suffer because Bell Canada will not be able to make the investments to keep Canadians at the leading edge of communications technology and services," McLennan said. "Our company is in the midst of a revolutionary process of transformation to meet the competition. We are cutting our costs dramatically, which will require a painful reduction of 10,000 employees -- 20 percent of our work force. "But all this will still not be enough to equip Bell to invest in technology and better service, as we must. Today, our company is earning a return of only 6.5 percent, far below what's needed to attract the capital we require when investors can earn more with no risk in a government bond," McLennan said. "What we are asking for today is just a fair chance to compete. Canada's telecommunications industry has been one of this nation's greatest success stories and the opportunities ahead are limitless, provided that industry and government co-operate to do what's needed to win," McLennan concluded. The Petition -- What's it All About? On October 31, 1995, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) rendered a decision (Telecom CRTC Decision 95-21) which Bell Canada believes undermines a viable Canadian industry, puts Canadian jobs in jeopardy, and impedes the ability of Canadian companies to compete against international giants, both at home and abroad. Bell Canada is therefore filing a Petition requesting that the Governor-in-Council vary CRTC Decision 95-21 and put in place rules that strengthen, rather than weaken, the ability of Canada's telephone companies to provide Canadians with the benefits of a strong domestic telecommunications infrastructure. Terry Flanagan Corporate Communications Bell Canada tflanaga@on.bell.ca For more information about this and other Bell Canada issues, visit our web site at: http://www.bell.ca [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Unfortunatly much of the transmission sent by Mr. Flanagan was garbled, and what appears above is what I was able to reconstruct. Nigel Allen also reports on this in the next message in this issue. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:50:05 -0500 From: Nigel Allen Subject: Bell Canada Asks to Overturn CRTC Decision Organization: Internex Online Here is a press release from Bell Canada. I found the press release on the Canada Newswire web site at http://newswire.flexnet.com/ BELL CANADA CHALLENGES CRTC RULING OTTAWA, Nov. 30 - In a petition filed today with the federal Cabinet, Bell Canada has requested an overhaul of regulatory rules that are hobbling the company's ability to complete and providing an unfair advantage to foreign-backed competitors. ``What is at stake here is a viable, Canadian-based telecommunications industry that can generate jobs, investment, R&D and economic growth for Canada,'' said John McLennan, Bell's President and chief Executive Officer. The Bell petition specifically asks the goverment to repeal that part of the recent ruling by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (Decision 95-21, October 31) requiring that Bell's long distance rates be reduced to fully offset the revenue generated by the local rate increases ordered by the CRTC. ``We are making this request because the mandated further reduction of long distance rates is based on faulty principle, is being inequitably applied, and is patently unnecessary to bring about lower long distance rates for our customers,'' McLennan said. The CRTC has a dury to allow just and reasonable rates and that standard has not been respected. The basic purpose of CRTC Decision 95-21 is to divide the telephone business into a ``competitive'' segment - primarily local service - where traditional rate of return regulation continues to apply. But by mandating specific long distance toll decreases, the CRTC is in fact not allowing market forces to determine outcomes in the competitive segment. This is blatantly inconsistent with its own principle. ``The CRTC is telling us what prices we're allowed to charge in an intensely competitive business, but has ignored the regulatory standard of a reasonable rate of return. We're left with the worst of both worlds and that's fundamentally unfair,'' McLennan said. Moreover, the CRTC's decision is inequitable. The mandated long distance price cuts apply to Bell Canada but not to its competitors. Companies like Sprint and AT&T-backed Unitel, which are affiliated with US giants, already enjoy a host of regulatory advantages. Now they will be allowed to further reduce the contributions they are required to make in support of low local rates, but without any requirement to cut their long distance prices. The long distance price cuts which Bell is being ordered to make are already taking place. ``Average long distance prices have been cut in half since 1986. They are now about equal to US rates, while our local rates are roughly half those in the United States. In the last year alone, Bell's customers - mostly in the residential and small business markets - have benefited from price reductions of $200 million on long distance,'' McLennan said. ``Clearly, the competitive marketplace is working for our customers. ``However, if the government fails to take the steps we are requesting, it is the customer who will ultimately suffer because Bell Canada will not be able to make the investments to keep Canadians at the leading edge of communications technology and services,'' McLennan said. ``Our company is in the midst of a revolutionary process of transformation to meet the competition. We are cutting our costs dramatically, which will require a painful reduction of 10,000 employees - 20 percent of our work force. ``But all this will still not be enough to equip Bell to invest in technology and better service, as we must. Today, our company is earning a return of only 6.5 percent, far below what's needed to attract the capital we require when investors can earn more with no risk in a government bond,'' McLennan said. ``What we are asking for today is just a fair chance to compete. Canada's telecommunications industry has been one of this nation's greatest success stories and the opportunities ahead are limitless, provided that industry and government co-operate to do what's needed to win,'' McLennan concluded. For further information: Marg Eades, Bell CanadaCommunications, (613) 781-2456 (business), (613) 736-0645 (residence), or Linda Gervais, Bell Canada Communications,(613) 781-3724, (613) 825-4460 (residence) 14:22 Eastern 30-Nov-1995 @ CANADA NEWSWIRE @ ------------------------------ From: bellaa@microsoft.com Subject: Microsoft Network Offers Enhanced World Wide Web Site Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:26:06 -0800 From: Pamela Bridgeport (Xenix) Sent: Thursday, November 30, 1995 11:19 AM To: ACG/CSD News Reports; MSN News Reports; MSN Team Cc: MSN Library Research; Pamela Bridgeport (Xenix) Subject: MSN, The Microsoft Network, Offers Enhanced World Wide Web Site MSN, THE MICROSOFT NETWORK OFFERS ENHANCED WORLD WIDE WEB SITE New msn.com Site Delivers Unique Features Including Customizable Start Page NEW YORK, Nov. 30 /PRNewswire/ -- Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT) today announced that MSN(TM), The Microsoft Network made available an enhanced version of its World Wide Web (WWW) site, http://www.msn.com. This new Web site provides new features and services that allow people to more easily navigate the Web and create a customizable Web start page. The new msn.com site is already one of the most popular Internet Web sites, with over 1.3 million hits per day after only three months of service. "Our goal is to establish MSN as one of the premier destinations on the Internet," said Russell Siegelman, vice president of The Microsoft Network division at Microsoft. "We're excited to broaden MSN by making these new services available to anyone on the Internet. We believe that people will find msn.com and its customizable start page to be a valuable part of their everyday Internet experience." The msn.com site includes links to the most popular Web sites and services, powerful searching tools from Yahoo, Lycos and Infoseek, information on Microsoft(R) products, and a tutorial for first-time Internet users that provides tips to get the most out of the WWW. It also includes highlights and instant shortcuts to the additional unique multimedia content available to members of MSN. A new customized start page feature allows users to add up-to-the- minute content selected from a list of popular Internet Web sites onto their versions of the MSN home page. After a quick and easy process of selecting desired content, the custom start page is automatically displayed whenever the user goes to http://www.msn.com. For example, customized start pages can include stock quotes from Data Broadcasting Corp.; news from USA Today and the Excite bulletin from Architext; sports scores from ESPN's "SportsZone"; computer news from Ziff-Davis; movie show times, tickets and information from MovieLink; television listings from TV1; and instant links to comics from United Media. "We are thrilled to be working with Microsoft on this new addition to The Microsoft Network," said Lorraine Cichowski, vice president and general manager of the USA Today Information Network. "MSN has been growing at a very quick rate, and it has been a solid source of customer traffic for USA Today online." The http://www.msn.com site is accessible by all users of the Internet, at no charge, using any Web browser that supports tables. In addition, msn.com will give users the ability to view inline video and hear background music if they are using Microsoft Internet Explorer 2.0. The Microsoft Network is one of the world's leading Internet service providers, offering integrated Internet access including an e-mail account, full World Wide Web access (where available) with seamlessly integrated links to popular Web sites, and thousands of Internet newsgroups. MSN also offers hundreds of special-interest bulletin boards and unique multimedia content such as encyclopedias, dictionaries, home-repair titles, car-buying guides, and up-to-date news and information from the service's news package, MSN News. MSN has content relationships with numerous companies such as NBC, Paramount, USA Today, United Airlines, Starwave Corp., Dun and Bradstreet, and Individual Inc. The Microsoft Network is available in 50 countries and access software is localized into 26 languages. Founded in 1975, Microsoft (Nasdaq: "MSFT") is the worldwide leader in software for personal computers. The company offers a wide range of products and services for business and personal use, each designed with the mission of making it easier and more enjoyable for people to take advantage of the full power of personal computing every day. Microsoft and MSN are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corp. in the United States and/or other countries. The Microsoft Network is operated by Microsoft Corp. on behalf of Microsoft Network LLC. If you are interested in viewing additional information on Microsoft please check out the Microsoft Web page at http://www.microsoft.com/corpinfo/pr.htm on Microsoft's corporate information pages. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Microsoft is one of the sponsors of this Digest. A grant from Microsoft last summer enabled me to publish the Digest through the end of this year, and a couple days ago I was notified that the grant will continue during the year to come. Readers who wish to extend thanks to Microsoft for this gift to the Digest should address notes to charlesf@microsoft.com with a cc: to tnixon@microsoft.com. Please do check out their web page mentioned above when you get a chance. It is very informative and interesting. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:48:26 -0600 From: rwhiting@winternet.com (Rick Whiting) Subject: Maximum Throughput Over Phone Line This is in answer to the question "is 19.2 Kbps the fastest speed that can be supported over a dial-up telephone line." Summary The theoretical maximum transmission rate on a dial-up phone line is about 34,000 bits per second. Relatively common modems conforming to ITU-T Specification V.34 achieve 28,800 (28.8K) bps on good connections. Compression schemes, e.g., ITU-T V.42bis, can increase the effective throughput, depending on the nature of the information being sent. Baud is the signaling rate. Bps is the throughput in bits per second. In any system these two rates may, or may not, be the same. But even if the rates are the same, they are definitely not the same concepts. In the modems we use today, the throughput in bps is significantly higher than the 2,400 baud maximum signaling rate on a typical dial-up phone line. Details The audio frequency carrier wave transmitted by a modem on a phone line may be uniquely described at any instant by three parameters: frequency, phase, and amplitude. Information is conveyed by changing one or more of these parameters, a process called modulation. Indeed, modulation is defined as "varying the frequency, phase, and/or amplitude of a wave to convey information." A set of unique states (frequencies, phases, and/or amplitudes) can be defined as "signals." The rate of change between states is the signaling rate measured in signals/second. The unit of signaling rate is the baud. One baud equals one signal per second. If there are two states in the signaling suite then the signals can represent only one bit each, i.e., 0 or 1. In this simple case, the signaling rate (baud) and bit rate (bps) would be the same. However, the signaling suite can include any number of unique signal states. For example, if there are four possible states for each signal then each signal can represent two bits, e.g., 00, 01, 10, and 11. Thus, the bit rate would be twice the signaling rate, or two bits per baud. It follows that an eight state signal suite, e.g., four phases and two amplitudes, yields three bits/baud. The signaling rate (baud) is directly related to occupied bandwidth. Dial-up phone lines are limited to about 3,000 Hz bandwidth. In practice, this restricts a modem to no more than about 2,400 baud. The number of bits/baud is limited by signal to noise ratio (S/N). For example, with phase shift keying (PSK), it requires at least a 3 dB increase in S/N for each doubling of the bit rate per baud. The combination of real life bandwidth limitations and S/N ratios currently limits most modems for dial-up lines to 2,400 baud and 28.8 Kbps (12 bits/baud throughput). The theoretical bps limit is not much higher. Manufacturers are just beginning to introduce modems that achieve 30K+ bps. However, it takes a very good dial-up connection to support these speeds. Indeed, many people seldom achieve 28.8 Kbps. The modems determine at the time of connection the highest rate that the connection can support. The bottom line is that, in the modems we use today, the throughput in bps is significantly higher than the 2,400 baud maximum signaling rate. Readily available modems in the $200 price range can achieve 28.8 Kbps. When sending plain text, compression schemes such as V.42bis may increase the effective throughput by up to four times, e.g., to 115.2 Kbps. (The actual compression ratio is highly dependent on the nature of the data being sent.) However, unless you're using a 16550 UART in your serial port you will not be able to handle this throughput. Note that compression does not increase the line rate. The modem "decompresses" the data received over the phone line and presents the higher data rate to your PC. It is not always clear how many bits are being used to represent an alphanumeric character. Although ASCII is a 7-bit code, 8-bit bytes may be used. Given 8 bits per character, 28.8 Kbps is 3,600 characters per second (CPS). If a compression ratio of 4:1 is achieved, the throughput would be 14,400 CPS (again, assuming your serial port can handle it). Since there is some overhead in the transmitted frames, e.g., for error detection and correction, actual throughput will be slightly less. Richard A. (Rick) Whiting Phone: + 1 612 550 1213 5780 Rosewood Ln. N. E-mail: rwhiting@winternet.com Plymouth, MN 55442-1411 Packet: W0TN @ WB0GDB.MN.USA.NOAM U.S.A. Fax: Number on request ------------------------------ From: Keith Jarett Subject: Roadside Call Box Mismanagement Date: 30 Nov 1995 21:42:45 GMT Organization: TCSI Yesterday I witnessed a freeway accident in the SF Bay area in which a motorcyclist did several hundred feet of head-first asphalt skiing. I pulled over to a call box to request an ambulance and such, and was put on hold for ten minutes! (Actually, it might have been longer, but I gave up since someone would have called it in on a cellular phone.) The recording continually stated that operators were busy handling other "emergency calls". Not! Why can't they spend a few seconds with each caller to determine the seriousness of the call *before* putting you on hold for such a long time? When I called the CHP later, they said that you should find a regular phone and dial 911 in case of a *real* emergency. Your tax dollars at work ... keith@tcs.com Keith Jarett ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #499 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 30 22:54:01 1995 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA12593; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 22:54:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 22:54:01 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199512010354.WAA12593@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #500 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Nov 95 22:54:00 EST Volume 15 : Issue 500 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Call For Papers: International Communications Forecasting (K.Bjornstad) SMDR Data Available? (Jeff Keller) 1-800 Number Questions (Robert Wilson) 407 Split Announced (John Mayson) Need Help in Modem Bank Capacity Planning (Jeff Nichols) Bandwidth Over POTS/Twisted Pair - Shannon (Mike Petsalis) Telephony Products Engineer Required in Minneapolis, MN (Softrix HRD) AT&T CellCard (Jeff Giddings) Telephone to Satellite to Telephone Communication (71726.3403@compuserve) Re: GSM in America: How Far Along? (Al Varney) Looking for Electrical Protection Information (John Carroll) What's Wrong With Shielded Cable? (David Hall) Re-associating a Phone Terminal (Carl Manion) Search Equipment Exchange (Joseph Stephens) Correction and Apology (Jeff Buckingham) Last Laugh! Award Recipient Report (Foster Schucker) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at ftp.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kent.u.bjornstad@bell-atl.com Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:51:18 -0500 Subject: Call For Papers: International Communications Forecasting I would ask you to consider placing the call for papers announcement for the 1996 International Communications Forecasting Conference into your newsletter. It is provided below. If you have any questions regarding the Conference please contact me. Kent Bjornstad Bell Atlantic 540 Broad Street Room 200H Newark, N.J. 07101 201 649-2605 1996 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS FORECASTING CONFERENCE (ICFC) CALL FOR PAPERS --------------- Demand Analysis and Forecasting with Competition in the Information Age Dallas, Texas, U.S.A. April 16 - 19, 1996 Hosted by GTE, SBC & SPRINT The 14th Annual International Communications Forecasting Conference is an international professional forum for telecommunications forecasters, demand and market analysts and planners to present the state of art information and analysis. The annual ICFC provides the opportunity for discussion, presentation and review of existing and emerging issues as they pertain to telecommunications forecasting and planning, demand analysis, market research and cost analysis. The theme of the 1996 conference is "Demand Analysis and Forecasting with Competition in the Information Age". As telecommunications technology advances rapidly and competition intensifies, the traditional governmental regulations become less meaningful. Furthermore, the competition and technology transcend national boundaries affording unprecedented international competition and cooperation. Both wireline and wireless service areas now extend beyond familiar regional and national boundaries and most large telecommunications companies have become multinational. Nevertheless, business planning and forecasting must still be based on knowledge of customers, competitors and markets along with sharper focus on internal costs and efficiencies. How can customer behavior be understood in an environment of reduced regulation, technological advance, increased national and international competition and blurring of service distinctions? The 1996 ICFC is the premier forum for discussion and debate of the forecasting and demand analysis challenges. The conference will include plenary sessions, concurrent sessions and tutorials. The conference also hosts a Technology Showcase in which vendors of the latest forecasting techniques, demand analysis tools and information management display their products. Professionals and academics with expertise in communications demand/market analysis, forecasting, industry competition, communications technology and related fields are strongly invited to submit papers for the concurrent sessions on areas of interest as listed below. Please submit abstracts of 200 words or less by mail, fax or e-mail on or before February 15, 1996 to: Peter S. Chung Tel: 214-718-5491 Co-Chairperson 1995 ICFC Fax: 214-718-4299/4977 GTE Telops, HQE03D37 600 Hidden Ridge Dr. Irving, TX, 75038, USA Internet: Peter.S.Chung@GTE.sprint.com Abstracts will be reviewed by the conference Planning Committee and notification of acceptance will be given by March 5, 1996. The presentations generally run about 20 minutes in duration, followed by a brief discussion. If more time is required for your proposed presentation or you have any special audiovisual or computer requirements, please indicate so in your abstract. 1996 ICFC Call for Papers Topics Demand & Market Analysis: ------------------------ Access Demand for Local Services Optimal Calling Packages LEC Entry into InterLATA Services Flat vs. Usage based Local Services Own & Cross Price Elasticities Firm vs. Market Elasticities New Product Introductions Local Number Portability Other related topics Competition: ------------ Impact of Local Loop Competition LATA Toll Competition and Market Share Competition in the Local Loop: LEC, IXC, CAP, Cellular, ALEC, CATV, PCN Loyalty/Retention & Market Share Prediction Game Theory & Simulation for Market Shares in the Competitive Environment Other related topics Information Technologies: ------------------------- Changing Internet Roles Coming ISDN Age Video on Demand SONET, AIN, ATM, FTTC, FTTH Rejuvenation of Twisted Pairs Broadband Technology Network is the Solution PCS/Cellular/Wireline Substitution Communications & Multimedia Satellite Competition & Consortium GIS Technology & Competition Other related topics Forecasting: ------------ New Products/Services Forecasting Market Survey & Forecasting Market Share Predictions Competitive Intelligence into Forecasts LATA Toll Forecasting & Competition InterLATA Access Demand Forecasts International Forecasting Unbundling & Local Access Forecast Broadband & Bandwidth Forecasting Other related topics Regulatory & Industry Dynamics: ------------------------------- Price Cap Viability Alternative Access Provision Resale of Local Services One-Stop Shopping for Services Bundling Local Services with Vertical & Toll Services IXC Entry to Local Services International Combinations of Communications Providers Combination of LEC, IXC & Wireless Other related topics If you wish to register for the Conference now, please provide the information requested and mail to the address below. The early registration fee is $500.00 in U.S. dollars. After March 25, 1996 the registration fee will be $550.00 in U.S. dollars. Payment may be made by check or money order. ICFC Attn: Don Gorman 204 Murray School Road Pottstown, PA 19465 Telephone 610 469-0515 Fax 610 469-0515 First Name________________Last Name____________________ Company Name and Title_________________________________ Street_____________________________City________________ Prov./State___________________Country__________________ Postal Code/Zip___________________ Telephone_______________________Fax____________________ Internet E-Mail______________________________ Method of Payment Check[ ] Money Order[ ] Make Checks and Money Orders payable to "ICFC 1996" ------------------------------ From: Jeff Keller <75542.3426@CompuServe.COM> Subject: SMDR Data Available? Date: 30 Nov 1995 17:29:10 GMT Organization: SelectNet I am interested in collecting information about different KSU/PBX SMDR outputs for potential product development (i.e. format, field length etc.) Aside from contacting every major manufacturer, does anyone have this information available? ------------------------------ From: dcomm@ix.netcom.com (Robert Wilson) Subject: 1-800 Number Questions Date: 30 Nov 1995 22:28:02 GMT Organization: Netcom I want to add an 800 number to my new business. I am in the BellSouth region and was told by someone there that all 800 numbers have been exhausted and they don't know when new ones will be available. I could tell by her response that this is the canned reply to 800 number inquiries. I know these numbers are recycled. Where is the best place to check? Is it AT&T, MCI, others? What questions should I ask to get solid answers? If I had my way, I would like to use a vanity 800 number. I have called some of the numbers I would like and on several occasions have received an "unable to complete your call as dialed" response. Does this mean that it is available? Any help is greatly appreciated. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't bother with any of the major players mentioned above. So many of those people have been trained to believe that a customer is an interuption to their work rather than the *purpose* of it. Try one of the smaller vendors, who for some reason seem to still have plenty of 800 numbers available and in stock, although I don't know about the specific number you are interested in. Since I have promoted them quite a bit in the past month or so I won't mention any by name, but a couple of 800 vendors are regular readers here, so I imagine they'll be responding to you in a short time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jmayson@p100dl.ess.harris.com (John Mayson) Subject: 407 Split Announced Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 16:32:59 EST I heard on WTKS 104.1 Orlando that 407 will be split. The new area code will be 561. The Palm Beaches and Treasure Coast (Palm Beach, Martin, St Lucie, and Indian River counties) will get the new area code while Brevard, Osceola, Orange, and Seminole will remain in 407. I was hoping those of us in the Orlando/Space Coast area would get an NNX area code just for the novelty. ;-) But I must admit this makes sense. This part of the state has a lot more industry and would be less costly to business to change the southern half of 407. Not much of anything goes on on the Brevard-Indian River county line (the dividing line) so the division makes sense. John Mayson | Palm Bay, Florida | john.mayson@harris.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am anxiously awaiting mid-January when our area code changes to 847 for the same reason. It will be fun listening to all the people who fill out forms telling me that I don't know what my correct number is. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jlnichol@ffx.mobil.com (Jeff Nichols) Subject: Need Help in Modem Bank Capacity Planning Date: 30 Nov 1995 15:55:49 GMT Organization: USMR Telecom I'm looking for a formula or software tool to calculate the number of modems and phone lines that should be allocated for peak usage. The scenario would be that the users dial in to a modem bank for ten minutes each, three times a day. The total number of users is 600. How many modems/lines should I have so the caller would not get a busy signal more than one time in five minutes? Which formula or where can I find a utility to do this calculation. Thanks, jlnichol@ffx.mobil.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I assume you are unable to specifically assign them their time periods. For example, User 309, you call in at 8:10 AM, 2:40 PM and 7:55 PM. Are you going to have to deal with them calling at their pleasure, as 'things' occur which prompt them to call? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:06:51 +0000 From: michael petsalis Subject: Bandwidth Over POTS/Twisted Pair - Shannon Organization: Bell-Northern Research Hello all, I've been trying to figure out what it is about POTS that limits the usable BW to around 3400 Hz, which ultimately, according to Shannon, limits the capacity of the channel to around 35 Kbits/sec. Since twisted copper pair has a much higher BW, I presume that there is some device on the line that limits the BW to the voiceband (someone mentioned loading coils). Is this device on every POTS line? How is it that we can take that same copper pair and put ISDN on it at 144 Kbits/sec or more? Do these devices need to be removed? How is it that we can put Mbits/sec over the same copper pair with ADSL? I'm clearly missing something here ... Many questions, I know. I would really appreciate if someone could point me to a reference where I can get the answers to these questions. This software guy thanks everyone for their help. MikeP ------------------------------ From: hrd@softrix.com (Softrix HRD) Subject: Telephony Products Engineer required in Minneapolis,MN Date: 30 Nov 1995 19:21:25 GMT Organization: Softrix, Inc. Location: Minneapolis, MN Required Skills: Experience with telephony, public switched telephone network, modems, PBX, telephony protocols, call signaling and routing. Must have knowledge of both analog and digital phone systems. Experience in analog and digital circuit design, and firmware design. BS required. Industry Experience: 2+ Years Salary: to $50K + Benefits Please send your resume immediately by e-mail (preferred) to : hrd@softrix.com or by Fax to : 908-271-9401 SOFTRIX, Inc. 1308 Centennial Ave., #194 Piscataway, NJ 08854 ------------------------------ From: sis.intl@ix.netcom.com Subject: AT&T CellCard Date: 30 Nov 1995 23:40:20 GMT Organization: Netcom I have read some information regarding a smartcard that you put into a AT&T GSM cellular phone and enables you to make and receve calls using the one phone number all over the world. In other words, if someone is trying to reach you, they can call just one number and get in touch with you regardless if you are in Italy, Thailand, or any country AT&T has wireless serices. This card sounds pretty neat, but does anyone have any details on how the thing works? Any technical info or specs would be greatly appreciated. Jeff Giddings ------------------------------ From: DTobler <71726.3403@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Telephone to Satellite to Telephone Communication Date: 30 Nov 1995 14:07:42 GMT Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736) Looking for a piece of equipment that will monitor several phone lines and convert the analog signal to a digital signal and pass it on for Satellite uplink. After info is processed on other end the signal would then be returned to be converted back to analog and passed on to the originator. Any and all help in identifing the type of equipment need would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp5.ih.att.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: GSM in America: How Far Along? Organization: AT&T Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 21:23:13 GMT In article , Phbishop wrote: > Can anyone provide an update on the status of GSM/PCS1900 standardization > in the U.S.? I know that ANSI has standardized the 1.9 MHz air interface > (J.STD-007), but I am not sure about the operational and numbering issues > such as: > -Phone numbers: Will the North American Numbering Plan be extended to > assign an NDC to each network? If so, have NDCs been assigned? [bunch of items deleted] > I am curious to know which of these have been resolved, and which > forum has decided or will decide, (Bellcore, ANSI, TIA, CTIA, PCIA > etc.). I would like to make contact with anyone who is involved with > the standardization process. The TR46.2 Subcommittee and the "North American PCS1900 Action Group (NPAG)" are both involved in numbering issues related to PCS1900. I'll send you contact telephone numbers. The assignment of E.164 telephone numbers to HLRs to support International Roaming within the USA is under consideration by TR46.2. NPAG is driving the more ubiquitous usage of NANP numbers as HLR addresses for inter-MSC queries. Both have presented requests for a new SS7 Translation Type ("E.164 Global Titles") to T1S1. Given that subscriber numbers may become "portable" in the future, this may require ten-digit translation of a MIN-to-HLR. Al Varney ------------------------------ From: jcarrol@io.org (John Carroll) Subject: Looking for Electrical Protection Information Date: 30 Nov 1995 17:02:44 GMT Organization: Internex Online, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (416 363 3783) Can anyone advise where I can find info/discussions re electrical protection for telecom circuits? I am looking into IEEE for standards groups, but am interested in working-level info/comments/problems/dis- cussions. ------------------------------ From: drhall@ix.netcom.com (David Hall ) Subject: What's Wrong With Shielded Cable? Date: 30 Nov 1995 17:43:38 GMT Organization: Netcom In my reading about home ISDN they recommend catagory 3 or greater unshielded twisted pair. Some warn against shielded cable (even for POTS wiring). But I've seen no explanation of what's wrong with shielded cable. Any informed explanations or pointers to accessable references will be greatly appreciated. I'm interested both with regard to ISDN and POTS. ------------------------------ From: tldbbs@ix.netcom.com (Carl Manion) Subject: Re-Associating a Phone Terminal Date: 30 Nov 1995 19:05:23 GMT Organization: Netcom I am trying to re-associate a phone terminal so it will be capable of receiving two separate phone lines. I know I could pay the phone company to do it, but they charge $85.00 and I know its not that difficult. Could anyone give me any help? Carl Manion tldbbs@ix.netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Could you be a little more precise about what you want to do? Do you have two telephone lines coming in and you want them to go to one single phone? Do you need assistance in finding out which wires do what at the terminal box? Please explain your circumstances a little better. PAT] ------------------------------ From: felix@houston.net (Joseph Stephens) Subject: Search Equipment Exchange Date: 30 Nov 1995 16:11:10 GMT Organization: Houston SuperNet (houston.net) Search Equipment Exchange based in Houston, TX is an infomation service which lists used and unused Telecommunication Equipment such as: PBX, phones, cards, complete systems, maintenance materials and hard to find items. We will list want to buys from end users and dealers on our system for free. If you want to list a want to buy call 1-800-252-5969 ext 27 and talk to Michael Jacobs. Also we are compiling an interconnect directory. If you are an interconect and would like to be listed, please call Michael Jacobs for an input form. If you have any questions regarding Search Equipment Exchange, please call or E-mail root@atchou.com. ------------------------------ Subject: Correction and Apology From: Jeff_Buckingham@CallAmerica.Com (BUCKINGHAM, JEFF) Date: 30 Nov 95 17:18:47 EST On July 30 and August 4, 1995 I criticized Pacific Bell and one of its employees, Bob Reward, for a wain-bote script used by Pacific Bell. My remarks went to far and were not fair either to Pacific Bell or to Bob. As a competitor, I may have become upset with some of Pacific Bell's sales practices, but that does not necessarily make them anticompetitive or misleading. I regret any harm that my comments may have caused. Jeff Buckingham Call America, San Luis Obispo, CA E-mail: jbucking@callamerica.com Home Page: www.callamer.com MyLine Virtual Number: 805-545-5100 (Voice and Fax) ------------------------------ From: foster@omni.voicenet.com (Foster Schucker) Subject: Last Laugh! Award Recipient Report Date: 30 Nov 1995 22:23:50 GMT Organization: Voicenet - Internet Access - (215)674-9290 My 14 year old son received mail today announcing that he had won either a 1995 Automobile valued at $15,000 or a cash award. All he needs to do is call 1-900-344-8018. It does say that the number is available 24hrs/7 days/$3.98 per min/avg call 7 mins/18 years or older. So we check the Consumer Disclosure. It appears from the odds sheet that thye have issued 4,987,654 of these things, and that there are about 65 total prizes, except for the last one; winning $1 at (1:1) odds. Let's see, assuming 700,000 in mailing costs, plus 100,000 in prizes over $1. If 20% of the "lucky" people call in at $28 for the call minus cost, etc. it comes to a cool $750,000 profit for the contest promoter. We decided not call. But we are thinking of starting our own contest ;-) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Guffaw: Very clever of them isn't it! You may recall a month or so ago I printed here a legal notice sent to me by the Federal Court saying that MCI had agreed to settle with people who had been taken in by that scam. It seems most people win 'prizes' which are less than the cost of the phone call to collect them. You and your son were smart to check out the whole thing first. Ah, but what people won't think of! A couple days ago, I was over at the bus station here in Skokie doing something for my friend Jim, who has the Greyhound agency in our village. A woman comes bustling in, rushes right up to the ticket counter and with a panic-stricken look on her face she declares, 'This is an emergency! I work for the hospital and they have just called me on their beeper and I must call in right away! I have no change at all, and every payphone around here is busy. Will you please make the call for me from your phone here? Always eager to be helpful, Jim replies, 'certainly Madam. Tell me the number to dial' ... and he takes the phone off hook. The woman holds out her pager and says 'read the number off here'. Fortunatly Jim read it out loud as he was dialing it ... 'umm, nine seven six, mumble mumble, is that correct?' And he begins dialing ... Standing just a couple feet away, I hear that and my eyes get big, like saucers. Imagine Mister Dithers, Dagwood Bumstead's boss in a fit of pique, and you will know my reaction. I reached over in a hurry and punched down on the plunger cutting him off. I told him wait a minute, that is a call to some premium charge sex line or similar. It *certainly* is not a number at the hospital. 'Oh, there must be some mistake,' she says. I told her yeah lady, I bet there is a mistake 'of some sort'. This is not the type of beeper the switchboard at our local hospital issues to staff, I told her ... 'and before you tell me you work at some other hospital which *does* use this kind, let me also note that the time stamp on this very urgent message is from yesterday at ten in the morning. Sort of tardy about returning our calls are we? Have you been waiting around here since then waiting for one of our pay phones to be available?' The lady looks at me with pure hatred in her eyes. 'Well,' she says, 'I guess I will wait until I get home and then call them back and see what they want ...'. She turns and makes a hasty departure. Moral of the story: remember folks, just because someone walks up and tries to hustle you into letting them use your phone to make an 'emergency' call, don't feel you have to unthinkingly hand them the phone and give them carte blanche. In every case, *you* dial their 'emergency' number for them. You listen, and when there is an answer then you hand them the receiver. And get across to your employees the message that we do NOT dial 900/976/540 and/or other odd combin- ations of numbers just because someone tells us to. Furthermore, the better the person is dressed and the more they make demands and try to pressure you, the more likely it is they are a fraud. After all, no one is going to give any credence to statements from some old bum who hasn't bathed and has spittle running down his chin (consider your moderator/editor for example) but would you dare not obey a nice, well-dressed lady with a beeper in her purse who 'works for the hospital'? Have a nice weekend! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #500 ******************************