From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 7 11:12:40 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA08669; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 11:12:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 11:12:40 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611071612.LAA08669@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #601 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Nov 96 11:12:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 601 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Phone Advertising (Scott Robert Dawson) Pac Bell "Service" Anecdote (Eric C. Weaver) Weirdness in Switch Programming? (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: New Virus Warning (Tim Dillman) Re: New Virus Warning (neil@asiaonline.net) Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits (Kenneth A. Becker) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (Rahul Dhesi) Data Encryption on Modems (Dale Robinson) Re: AT&T Announces New Tariff in Boston Globe (Marty Tennant) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) Subject: New Phone Advertising Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 06:57:21 GMT Organization: InterLog Internet Services Reply-To: srdawson@interlog.com Hi! In today's {Globe and Mail} (Canada's Corporate, oops, sorry, I mean _National_ Newspaper), 6 November 1996, there is a rather detailed article about the new Northern Telecom screen phones (Vista 350, vith associated 'visual call-waiting' and other ADSI services), that were tested in London and Sherbrooke earlier this year and are now being rolled out across the Greater Toronto Area and the Communaut' Urbaine de Montreal. Headline: Ads, scores and more coming to a phone near you Subhead: Bell Canada launches interactive service By Lawrence Surtees Telecommunications Reporter TORONTO- Bell Canada has launched its "smart phone" service, Direct Access, that allows businesses to advertise on telephone screens and customers to shop, bank, scan the news -- even check their horoscope -- on a beefed-up phone. The Direct Access services are free to any of the phone company's customers, provided they have Touch Tone service on their normal phone line and a special Vista 350 screen phone. Customers may buy, rent or lease to own the Vista 350 phone, which sells for $295. Bell, the country's largest telephone company and a unit of Montreal-based BCE Inc, has more than seven million customers in Ontario and Quebec. The Vista 350 phone, which is made by Bell Canada's sister company, Mississauga-based Northern Telecom Ltd, is needed to use the service because of its eight-line electronic screen and extra keys. Those keys allow users to access information and to use arrow keys -- called "cursors" -- to scroll through information displayed on the screen. The phone also has a built-in modem to automatically call Bell's computer, which provides the the Direct Access services, such as lottery results, daily horoscopes and sports scores. It also has a built-in speaker to listen to pre-recorded messages from advertisers or service providers without lifting the handset. The interactive service, which allows customers to retrieve a variety of information from advertisers and service providers, is touted as turning an ordinary telephone into a home information centre. It also opens up a new world for local and national advertisers through its so-called "QuickAds". The Direct Access service allows businesses to store their messages on Bell Canada's computers, which, in turn, transmit the ads to the screens of subscribers' telephones when the phone is not in use. Advertisers can choose how many customers they want to reach and in what areas. "Unlike other forms of media, our service allows businesses to choose which neighbourhoods they want to reach based on postal codes," Carlos Panksep, Bell's associate director of new business oppurtunities, said in an interview. The Direct Access service also provides an advertiser with detailed records of how many times their service or message is seen, providing instant market research data. Customers also have the ability to select which ads they would like to receive, or to block out the ads altogether. The screen modules on the Vista 350 phones are removeable, allowing them to be replaced with upgraded versions. Bell is already thinking of a version that can be connected to a printer, which would allow customers to select and print junk mail that they choose to receive. "We see the service as a more targeted alternative to direct mail," Mr. Panksep said. Bell has also adopted a form of usage charge that advertisers will pay based on the actual number of times their message is viewed. The cost of advertising to Direct Access customers will range from 0.5 to 1.5 cents per person per day. But advertisers can also make use of the interactive component of the servoce, which allows customers to use the phone to immediately connect to a company to obtain more information or to order a product or service. Bell also announced partnerships yesterday with several major Canadian companies that will provide a variety of interactive services to consumers through Direct Access: *Royal Bank of Canada is using the service to offer more comprehensive home banking services than provided on conventional phones or ATM treminals, including access to current foreign exchange prices. *Canada Trust Co. is offering its customers access to daily mutual fund prices. *Cineplex Odeon Corp. is providing access to its film listings and ticket order service. *The Sports Network (TSN) is using the phone service to send the latest sports news and scores. *And Environment Canada provides the latest weather forecasts for any city selected. "The key to business in the 21st century is to be open for business any time, anywhere for the customer, and [this] helps us deliver on that promise," said Wendy Wynn, vice-president of direct banking at Royal. This service is based on the popular CallMall service introduced by New Brunswick Telephone Co. Ltd. and first tested under the "screen talk" name in Saint John in late 1992. The success of that venture led the phone company and Northern Telecom to create a joint venture, New North Media, to market the interactive service. Bell Canada's introduction of Direct Access follows a trial earlier this year in London, Ont., and Sherbrooke, Que. The interactive services on Direct Access are initially available in Toronto, London, Montreal and Sherbrooke and will be rolled out across the rest of Bell's territory next year. Scott Robert Dawson Genetics is fun, but srdawson@interlog.com _my_ family is defined by love... http://www.interlog.com/~srdawson/scothmpg.htm ------------------------------ From: weav@a.crl.com (Eric C. Weaver) Subject: Pac Bell "Service" Anecdote Date: 7 Nov 1996 13:27:04 GMT Organization: Fondue Forks for Everybody Sent one of my assistants up to San Francisco to check an ISDN line at a music venue where we had a show planned a few nights hence. Line didn't work. Called P*B priority repair to get somebody on scene and find, test and tag the line at the demarc. The appointment was for 9:00 AM. With my assistant waiting all morning, the tech showed up at 12:30 PM, found the problem, checked the line and all was well. Many phone calls to the ISDN maintainence group had ensued during the 3.5 hours he waited around, they were quite apologetic but didn't seem to have any control over the dispatching of technicians. When P*B tries billing the venue for $75 for the service call, they'll have a nasty surprise coming back to them. Is Pac*Bell just falling into a pit, or what? Eric C. Weaver Chief Eng. KFJC 89.7 Foothill College Los Altos Hills CA 94022 ------------------------------ From: cgordon@worldnet.att.net Subject: Weirdness in Switch Programming? Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 06:21:00 +0000 I've got "Busy Transfer" and "Alternate Answer" on my office line (630-832-xxxx); they are both set up to transfer calls to my cellular (630-253-xxxx) which has voicemail with paging. This gives me one-number reachability at a good price. (The two features cost 75 cents/month each, and the cellular voicemail is only $4.95) This has worked well for several months. But today I was expecting a call, and I didn't get it. So I called them. Turns out they were calling, but they were getting a recording: ("[SIT] The area code or number you have dialed is invalid.") The problem was with the forwarding; calls rang at the office just fine but when I wasn't there they forwarded to this recording. I dialed the cellular direct and it connected properly. The Ameritech repairs operator says that this was caused by "The area code change". (Which one? I dunno, we change an area code every couple of weeks around here. Anyway.) She says that the switch needs to be told to dial 1+AC+number even if the destination is in the same AC as the number being forwarded. Thing is, since the office line just changed from 708 to 630 while the cellular has always been 630, the switch should _already_ have been programmed that way. Apparently this problem only shows up if the destination is cellular. Can someone elaborate on this? They did get the programming fixed up pretty quickly (once I called, OTOH how long was it screwed up before I noticed?) so it wasn't a big problem. But this has got to be one of the ten worst things to do to a business line! Gordon S. Hlavenka cgordon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 96 09:13 EST From: Tim Dillman <0006540276@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: New Virus Warning -- [ From: Timothy J. Dillman * EMC.Ver #3.2 ] -- Found this on our intranet. Sounds like it is a virus to be taken seriously (at least the Department of Defense thinks so). SUBJECT: Malicious code in counterfeit PKZip program. Security Bulletin 9526 DISA Defense Communications System June 12, 1995 Published by: DDN Security Coordination Center (SCC@NIC.DDN.MIL) 1-(800) 365-3642 DEFENSE DATA NETWORK SECURITY BULLETIN The DDN SECURITY BULLETIN is distributed by the DDN SCC (Security Coordination Center) under DISA contract as a means of communicating information on network and host security exposures, fixes, and concerns to security and management personnel at DDN facilities. Back issues may be obtained via FTP (or Kermit) from NIC.DDN.MIL [192.112.36.5] using login="anonymous" and password="guest". The bulletin pathname is scc/ddn-security-yynn (where "yy" is the year the bulletin is issued and "nn" is a bulletin number, e.g. scc/ddn-security-9428). The following important advisory was issued by the Automated Systems Security Incident Support Team (ASSIST) and is being relayed unedited via the Defense Information Systems Agency's Security Coordination Center distribution system as a means of providing DDN subscribers with useful security information. Automated Systems Security Incident Support Team Bulletin 95-24 Release date: 8 June, 1995, 6:45 AM EDT (GMT -4) SUBJECT: Malicious code in counterfeit PKZip program. SUMMARY: Files falsely identified as being updates to the popular PKWARE Inc., PKZip utility contain malicious code. The files are being distributed on various network (Internet) and dial-up BBS systems. BACKGROUND: PKZip is a DOS shareware data compression utility. The counterfeit PKZip file is named either PKZ300B.ZIP or PKZ300B.EXE, and contains malicious code that can cause hard drives to be re-formatted. According to PKWARE, Inc., when the PKZ300B.EXE self extracting executable is run, all data on the hard drive is lost. The malicious code contained in the PKZ300B files is not a computer virus, i.e. it does not have the capability to automatically spread and infect other systems or files. IMPACT: All data on PC hard rive is lost when the corrupted program is executed. RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS: Do not download and/or execute any file named PKZ300B.EXE/ZIP. The most current release of PKZip from PKWARE Inc., is PKZ204G. exe which is available via anonymous FTP from pkware.com (IP 198.137.186.90) in the /pub/pkware directory. If you have a copy of the counterfeit PKZip utility, please contact ASSIST as soon as possible. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 11:03:39 HKT From: neil@asiaonline.net Subject: Re: New Virus Warning > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This message has been floating around > the net for awhile. I am not at all sure how authentic it is. It seems > to me I heard someone say it is completely bogus, but far be it from > me to say that authoritatively. Caution would be urged in examining it > I suppose. PAT] Pat, the PKZIP300 trojan has been around for a good couple of years, though the warning has only been around since early 1995 according to F-Prot (www.datafellows.com). As it's a trojan rather than a virus, it's very rare and not much of a threat. It's also easily spotted and cleaned by most AV software. I think the heavy use of caps and exclamation marks give the message away as bogus. That plus the suggestion that your modem speed could have any relevance to the behavior of a virus. neil ------------------------------ From: kab@hokab.hobl.lucent.com (Kenneth A. Becker) Subject: Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits Date: 7 Nov 1996 13:44:15 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Holmdel, New Jersey Reply-To: kab1@lucent.com In article , Bob Izenberg wrote: > Our regional telco isn't providing clocking on local area T1s. > The Ascend Pipeline 130s that we use on some of our circuits need a > stable clocking source and can't provide it themselves. One of our > options, which some will no doubt advocate, is forgetting all about > the P130s in favor of another vendor ... we're doing that. In the > meantime, I'd like to hear from anyone who's providing a clock source > for devices that need it but cannot derive it from the data line to > which they are connected, or from an internal source. To answer your question more information is needed. For example: You state that your telco isn't supplying clock for the T1's you're using. Silly question #1: Are your T1's coming from a switch (i.e., 5ESS or what have you)? (Case 1) If so, the telco's got a bigger problem - all of their T1's and such will be slipping around, giving FAX's a bad time, and so forth. The next possibility in line (Case 2) is that the T1's you're using are being carried around on DS3's or SONET links and the equipment doing the MUX/DMUX operation isn't synchronizing the T1's to network clock. This is not an unusual situation. The implication of that scheme is that whatever clocking a T1 has when it gets inserted into the pipe is the same clocking it gets when it gets removed from said pipe. This sounds like your case. Let's suppose, for the moment, that you're in case 2 above. Basic point: Somehow you are going to have to set up a timing chain with sources and receivers for >>all<< your T1's in your network. Some piece of equipment, somewhere, is going to be your timing master. All of your other equipment will time from that. Note that the timing chain does >>not<< have to be a single star pattern with the timing master in the center and the rest spread out around it; timing can go into one piece of equipment. The T1's leaving that equipment are now timed and can be used to time other equipment downstream. Just to make things a little more complicated for you, note that almost all synchronized equipment has >>two<< timing inputs, a primary and a secondary. The idea is that if one timing source goes away the equipment should automatically switch to the other, keeping the T1's healthy. Now, where to get master clock? Let's go through things in sequence. 1) The telco. Contrary to popular rumor and the occasional failure in the telco CO, >>all<< telco CO's in the US are timed from Boulder, CO, where the US's master timing sources live. Note that Boulder supplies the timing for the GPSS (Global Positioning Satellite Service); many BOC's and what have you retrieve the clock signals from the GPSS and use it to time their gear. Whatever; you can ask the telco to give you a timed T1 from any 1/0 DCS (Digital Cross-Connect System). They can take a single (or lots, if you've got tons of money) T1, route it through a DCS (where it will get the DCS's idea of proper timing) and then back through the pipe that was moving your data in the first place. You can then use the timing from the receive T1 pair to time your one of your pieces of equipment. This equipment will then be your timing master. The T1's from your master can then be used to time the rest of the equipment in your network. If you want to play it safe, you create a second timing master in some other physical location in the same way and use the T1's from that timing master to be the "secondary" timing source for the rest of your network. Note that the telco will charge you additional for the privilege of having a timed T1. I note from your letter above that your equipment doesn't take timing from the input T1's. That doesn't sound right; at least one or more T1's should be useable to synchronize the master clock in the gear. Well, suppose that your master clock wants to have a dedicated T1, or 64kb/s Composite Clock, or 2.048 MHz BSRF, or some other "common" timing signal. Contact Spectracom, Inc. They make these nifty blue boxes ($100 or so apiece?) that will take in a T1, 64K Composite Clock, 2.048 MHz BSRF, or what have you, and dump out the signal that you need to time your gear. It's probably cheaper to do this than to replace your equipment. There are probably other companies that make equivalents; I just haven't run into them yet. Next timing source: 2) Some kind of stable oscillator. The cheapest is to run out and get a >>good<< signal generator; you're probably talking a couple of grand here. The "right" way to do it is to go to Lucent or Telecom Solutions and buy one of their stand-alone timing references. Stratum 3 or 3E should do it for you. Cost? I haven't priced them, but I think it's in the $5000 - $20000 range. If you go the cheap route, you'll probably need one of those Spectracom boxes in addition. If you go the Lucent or Telecom Solutions route you won't need anything additional. If you have a serious ton of money you can go out and get a Rubidium or Cesium atomic clock; that, however, is probably overkill. Then there are (3) inventive solutions. One fellow I know was having similar problems timing his network and didn't like the money the telco was going to charge him for that timed T1. He discovered, however, that there was a PBX located in his building that was connected, through T1's, to the local CO switch. Switches >>are<< timed; therefore, so was that PBX. He took the liberty of running a T1 from that PBX through the building to where his equipment was placed, and in short order had a multi-state network timed properly. I hope the above gets you started. Kenneth A. Becker DACS Engineering Lucent Technologies ------------------------------ From: Rahul Dhesi Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Date: 7 Nov 1996 13:28:43 GMT Organization: a2i network > I do not know of any that charge per actual hit. PAT Now you do. From our new rate schedule: Monthly charge for exceeding scaled hits: $5 per 50,000 excess scaled hits/day in units of $5. Monthly charge for exceeding megabyte volume: $50 per 50 excess megabytes/day in units of $50. It's not as bad as it sounds, since some number of hits and megabytes are included in the base rate. Rahul Dhesi hostmaster & postmaster a2i communications network operations Rahul Dhesi "please ignore Dhesi" -- Mark Crispin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 21:34:06 -0900 From: Dale 'Cat' Robinson Subject: Data Encryption on Modems G'Day, I've been asked for an opinion on dial-up security. With the OS we use (Unisys CTOS), we only have three options as far as I can see: Callback. Bnet Node Access Checker. Modems with built-in data encryption (DES). Callback ~~~~~~~~ Has security problems. Bnet Node Access Checker ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A piece of software which looks at the "calling" system to see if they are authorised to perform different functions. I guess it would be possible to bypass it by pretending to be a "trusted" node. Modems with built-in DES ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Absolutely no experience with these. Can anyone tell me how secure this option is? Does it affect data transfer? I realise that key management might be a pain, having been involved in loading keys on a reguilar basis. My prior experience has been Racal line encryption boxes. Which worked very well, except when power dropped! Cost would stop us from using this as an option. Any comments would be appreciated! Thanks in advance, Dale 'Cat' Robinson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Nov 1996 09:39:49 -0800 From: Marty Tennant Reply-To: marty@sccoast.net Organization: Low Tech Designs, Inc. Subject: Re: AT&T Announces New Tariff in Boston Globe > On October 31, 1996, AT&T filed with the Federal Communications > Commission a Transfer Service Fee of $0.55 per call. The Transfer > Service Fee applies to all completed interstate calls and calls to > interstate and international Directory Assistance when the customer > transfers to the AT&T network from a Local Exchange Company network. Pat, I understand that this fee applies only if you are not a presubscribed AT&T customer making the calls. Notice it does not apply to intralata calls. In the cases where dual PIC has not been implemented, as required by the new law, the only way to get on the AT&T network for intralata calls is to dial the 10288 code. That's why AT&T sent out all those stickers. AT&T is doing this because they claim that these casual callers are more expensive to bill, because they have to obtain billing information from the LEC. This is a result of the lack of billing agreements between AT&T and the LECs since AT&T started doing their own billing. The West Virginia PSC denied AT&T's request to implement this same scheme for intrastate, interlata calls. They knew that many carriers were _encouraging_ people to dial their 10XXX code, and didn't want people to get the impression that all carriers added such charges. AT&T is not the only big carrier implementing such surcharges for casual calling. Marty Tennant President Low Tech Designs, Inc. Georgetown, SC ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #601 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 7 18:17:33 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id SAA19932; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 18:17:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 18:17:33 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611072317.SAA19932@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #602 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Nov 96 18:17:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 602 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecommunication Service Providers and Law Enforcement (Dale Robinson) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Wes Leatherock) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Ian Angus) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Bill Jenney) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Eric Florack) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (Eric Hunt) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (J.P. White) The Purpose of "500" Numbers (carickinc@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: * 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 21:34:13 -0900 From: Dale Robinson Subject: Telecommunication Service Providers and Law Enforcement While browsing Austel's web site, looking for information on telephone number changes, I saw this document: TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE PROVIDERS & LAW ENFORCEMENT Contents: 1.What are "service providers"? 2.Where does it say that service providers have obligations or responsibilities? 3.What obligations do service providers have? 4.What might happen if these requirements are not observed? 5.What are the law enforcement and national security obligations in particular? 6.What do service providers need to do to meet these obligations? 7.Provision of reasonably necessary help 8.Consulting about plans to introduce new services or new technology 9.Interceptibility 10.Possible Changes to this Framework Basic Information 1. What are "service providers"? Service providers (or more formally, suppliers of eligible services) are, in general terms, organisations or individuals working in the telecommunications industry which/who provide a service by means of a "line link" or facilities which include at least one "line link"; and provide that service to a third party; and are not licensed carriers, that is Telstra, Optus and Vodafone. [[Telstra, Optus & Vodafone are the current telco's in Oz.]] The service can be one that is bought from a carrier and resold without value-adding or it can be a service that uses carrier-provided facilities and substantially transforms them. It is intended as a very broad category that will still be relevant even as new services are developed, so it is not possible to list all the services that fall into the category, but it can include - providers of public switched and leased services; operators of 0055/190 services; [[similar I guess to the USA's 1-900 "services"]] operators of private networks; paging companies; Internet access providers (IAP's); hotel operators providing telephone access for their guests and making a surcharge; providers of public teleconferencing services; providers of EDI services; voicemail bureaux. 2. Where does it say that service providers have obligations or responsibilities? The Australian Government's Telecommunications Act 1991 sets out the framework and rules relating to telecommunications in Australia. It has a number of objectives relating to promotion of new services and enabling participation in the telecommunications industry, and it sets out the Class Licence system. This system is intended to regulate service providers in a "light-handed" way. AUSTEL, the Australian Telecommunications Authority, issues these class licences, so called because they apply to a class of people, not to individuals. There are other sections of this Act that apply to service providers. For law enforcement purposes, three important sections are - section 47 (AUSTEL, carriers and service providers to prevent use of networks and facilities in commission of offences); section 88 (Carriers, suppliers and their employees not to disclose or use contents of communications); and section 209 (Issuing of class licences) . Thus, the basis of these obligations is a law passed by Federal Parliament in 1991. As well, there is the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 which provides for carriers (in this Act that term also includes service providers) to execute a warrant for interception where it is duly served. This will apply to those service providers who carry telecommunications over a section of a network. 3. What obligations do service providers have? The main class licence, The Service Providers Class Licence (SPCL), sets out a number of conditions which include compliance with: technical standards; various Federal acts, such as the Radiocommunications Act 1992 and the Trade Practices Act 1974, requirements relating to fixed radiocommunications links; AUSTEL's directions, for example, about disclosing charges for a service. There are two other class licences as well: the International Service Providers Class Licence (ISPCL) and the Public Access Cordless Telecommunications Service Licence (PACTS). Another licence is currently being drafted: the Carrier Associates Class Licence. 4. What might happen if these requirements are not observed? Breach of conditions means that AUSTEL may declare a service to be unlicensed which would lead to disconnection. 5. What are the law enforcement and national security obligations in particular? These are the law enforcement obligations, derived from section 209 of the Telecommunications Act 1991, from the Service Providers Class Licence - A supplier must - (e) do its best to prevent telecommunications networks and facilities from being used in, or in relation to, the commission of offences against the laws of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory (f) in accordance with AUSTEL's requirements, consult with Commonwealth, State and Territory law enforcement agencies about the supplier's proposals to use new technology in its telecommunications activities or to develop new technology in order to so use it (g) give to officers and authorities of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory such help as is reasonably necessary to - (i) enforce the criminal laws and laws imposing pecuniary penalties (ii) protect the public revenue (iii) safeguard the national security and comply with AUSTEL's requirements in these regards. As well as these definite conditions, there is another consideration mentioned in the Guide to the Service Providers Class Licence - It will be particularly important for a supplier to ensure that its services are capable of being intercepted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979. In order to ensure that this requirement is observed it will be essential for a supplier to make use of the consultative arrangements at an early stage of the development of proposals. 6. What do service providers need to do to meet these obligations? Service providers need to do, in general terms, two things - 1.provide "reasonably necessary" help to law enforcement and national security agencies, on request. 2.consult law enforcement and national security agencies about their plans to introduce new technology. A brief summary of these obligations is given here, but more detail is available in Telecommunications and Law Enforcement.: For Organisations Providing Telecommunications Services. (It is hoped to reprint this publication). 7. Provision of reasonably necessary help This is an obligation about responding when asked for help. These are examples of the kind of help law enforcement and national security agencies might ask for - information from your customer information base. Perhaps the agency knows a name, a number or an address. It asks for more information about this customer from call charge records; or assistance in tracing a call. Some of the questions that need to be considered if your service is of the kind that might lead to law enforcement and national security agencies asking for help are - is the assistance asked for "reasonably necessary"? what arrangements do you need to have in place so that the information you have about law enforcement agencies' operations is secure? what arrangements do you need to have in place so that you can respond promptly? what is a fair charge to make for providing that help, considering that the charge should be by agreement or on a cost recovery basis? what do you do if a customer asks you if inquiries have been made about him or her? 8. Consulting about plans to introduce new services or new technology Subclause 5(f) of the Service Providers Class Licence, quoted above, places an obligation on service providers that where they are planning to introduce a service based on new technology, they must consult law enforcement and national security agencies about it in case that new service makes it harder for those agencies to fulfil their functions. This obligation requires service providers (and carriers) to take an initiative. It does not apply to new pricing arrangements for existing services, or to new ways of packaging existing services. It could apply, for example, to new kinds of voicemail, new data services, new ways of providing a fax service. Undertaking consultation is not hard. You ring AUSTEL and ask to speak to the Chairman of the New Technology Sub-Committee (NTSC) who is currently Mr John Haydon, General Manager, Industry Affairs, and you will be guided through the process. This group is a sub-committee of AUSTEL's Law Enforcement Advisory Committee (LEAC). Its members are representatives of the law enforcement and national security agencies, and it exists to be the vehicle for consultation about services based on new technology. 9. Interceptibility As mentioned in paragraph 4, a law enforcement or national security agency may obtain a warrant to intercept a particular service and will want you to execute it if it is a service provided by you. As well, the agencies may want you to ensure that the service is technically capable of being intercepted. If this is asked of your service, the principle established by the Federal Government is that the law enforcement agencies must pay you either an agreed amount or, if agreement cannot be reached, what it costs you, that is that you neither make a profit from providing the interception capability nor lose by it. 10. Possible Changes to this Framework Government policy is yet to be finalised for the period after June 1997, when the present carrier duopoly concludes. Dale 'Cat' Robinson ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 15:25:59 GMT John Stahl wrote: [ ... text deleted ... ] > Could it be that they really want to is charge for every call based > upon distance and time. Perhaps if given their own way, they would opt > to eliminate Flat Rate Service! Of course they do. There has never been any secret about it. We tried it in Oklahoma 10 or 15 years ago and the public and political outcry was so great that the public animus over the issue still haunts Southwestern Bell Telephone. (I was part of the effort ... it was a test to see how well it would fly in Southwestern Bell. The company was relying on studies that showed the majority of customers agreed it was "fair". The only thing is, they hated it with a passion worse than anything else the telephone company did or proposed. This was as true for customers you could prove would save money as for those who would pay more.) Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu ------------------------------ From: Ian Angus Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 10:54:54 -0500 Organization: Angus TeleManagement Group John Nagle wrote: > This whole thing seems a sort of bogus issue. First, unless > you're out behind some switching concentrator in outside plant, which > is rare, you have a dedicated path to the CO, so contention there > isn't an issue. Unfortunately, that simply isn't true. Telephone companies routinely install line concentrators between the CO switch and customers. The concentrators are in the CO building, but they are not part of the CO switch. So non-blocking switching does not guarantee that every phone can get dial tone simultaneously -- only that those which do get through the line concentrator can get a path through the switch. "Gridlock" can occur when there are unusually long holding time in locations where lines have bneen installed (and priced) on a 4:1 or even 6:1 concentration ratio. IAN ANGUS ianangus@angustel.ca Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca 8 Old Kingston Road tel: 905-686-5050 ext 222 Ajax ON L1T 2Z7 Canada fax: 905-686-2655 ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Date: 7 Nov 1996 16:04:57 GMT Organization: University of South Florida In article , lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) wrote: >> Has anyone considered simply requiring ISPs to be served by choke >> exchanges? It seems to me that choke exchanges were invented to solve >> this very problem (the overloading of trunks from residential prefix >> switches with calls to one or a few high-traffic numbers). Forgive me terribly if I'm missing something here, but isn't this how _all_ SS7 connected exchanges work? The call dies at the originating CO if there's not enough trunkage to handle it, or the target number is busy ... Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us Member of the Technical Staff Junk Mail Will Be Billed For. The Suncoast Freenet *FLASH: Craig Shergold aw'better; call 800-215-1333* Tampa Bay, Florida http://members.aol.com/kyop/rhps.html +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ From: jenney@niktow.canisius.edu (Bill Jenney) Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Date: 7 Nov 1996 06:48:39 GMT Organization: Canisius College, Buffalo, NY 14208 scott miller (smiller@nortel.ca) wrote: > I was under the impression that most local phone access was still > flat-rate. (e.g. free local calls) Does anyone know the ratios of > metered vs. flat-rate phones? Is flat-rate a thing of the past in the > US? Pivotal question! Who has some numbers? Here in NYNEX land, it looks like a metered world at every turn (resi, business, intraLATA, ...) bill j ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 09:18:40 PST From: Eric_Florack@xn.xerox.com (Florack,Eric) Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? In #594, Ian Angus writes to Tony Pelliccio: >> I'm sorry but the LEC's are completely responsible for this mess. Most >> of them never grew beyond the old AT&T manuals. The 4:1 ratio just >> doesn't cut it anymore and it hasn't cut it since the mid 80's and >> every single LEC knew it. > Okay -- now can we expect you to support local rate increases large > enough to pay for expansion of the PSTN to handle 36 ccs/line (60 > minutes/line/hour) of traffic from every telephone? Hi, Ian, Good to 'meet' you. Not to speak for Tony, but you've hit my hot button. Not I ... but you *can* expect me to call -loudly- for the supposed public service commissions to insist on lower or non-existant profit margins within the monopoly that LEC's are, until such expansions are paid for and installed. Consider; If this were a free market situation, this wouldn't even be a discussion, since the LEC's would have to have both the low cost and high traffic ability, to remain competitive. This would be the ideal situation. Tell me, Ian; In a free market situation, when a private company selling wares or services, does not anticipate the needs of it's customers, do their profit margins go down? I daresay they do... and they go down because people leave to go to another company that provides better. The company that does not provide better pays the price for their lack of planning, or incorrect planning.... even to the point of going out of business, or more likely, being bought up, or taken over. In a monopoly situation, however ... (As it is now,) the people have no such choice. All the telco needs to do is sit back and wait for the government to mandate higher prices to keep Telco's profit margins up. Regards to you, /E ------------------------------ From: ehunt@bga.com (Eric Hunt) Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 09:40:14 -0600 Organization: Lil' Ole' Me In article , Todd L. Sherman wrote: > I was shocked to view the South Fla. Scanning and DX'ing web page, > only to see a NOTICE by the web page author advising its users that > the author's page would be shut DOWN after every 5000 hits, because of > a "pay-per-hit" fee his ISP is suddenly hitting them with! Can you This is a growing "feature" of ISPs. I've seen some do it this way, with a hit-meter, while others monitor the bytes and put like a 5 megabyte a day (made up figure) cap on "personal" web pages. This is to stem the personal publishing tide, IMO, whereby someone puts up something really popular and causes a bandwith bottleneck at the ISP. Most of the time it's something sexual related, but popular political and social sites can also mushroom in popularity and overwhelm an ISP. Eric Hunt ehunt@bga.com (preferred) Austin, TX hunt@metrowerks.com http://www.realtime.net/~ehunt ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 09:25:16 -0800 From: JP White Reply-To: ffv.aerotech@ffvaerotech.com Organization: FFV Aerotech Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Todd L. Sherman wrote: > I was shocked to view the South Fla. Scanning and DX'ing web page, > only to see a NOTICE by the web page author advising its users that > the author's page would be shut DOWN after every 5000 hits, because of > a "pay-per-hit" fee his ISP is suddenly hitting them with! Can you > believe this? An ISP is actually charging its users for the number of > HITS to their own pages? Do many OTHER ISP's do this, too? I've > never heard of this before! > [...I do not know of any that charge per actual hit. PAT] Charging 'per hit' is not quite on the money. My ISP allows up to 10,000 hits per month for free, after which they charge $2.00 for each 1000 hits per month above the 10,000. Seems quite reasonable to me, if they have to service a lot of hits and need to 'gear up' their servers, they can't do this for nothing. The person 'enjoying' the benefit of a lot of hits should pay extra don't you think? Or do you think that the extra cost should be divided and bourne by all subscribers (even if they don't have a page at all, and use it as an on-ramp only!) Seems unfair to the average subscriber to ask him to subsidize all the local businesses in the local area! Get the businesses to pay!! They are the ones 'benefiting' if they designed their page correctly. The internet mindset that 'everything should be free' can only work up to a point. Large demands must be paid for, how else is the ISP meant to stay in business? (Last time I checked, ISP's hadn't registered themselves as charitable organizations). JP White Manager Information Systems FFV Aerotech Inc., Mail to : ffv.aerotech@ffvaerotech.com Web : http://www.ffvaerotech.com ------------------------------ From: CARICKINC@aol.com Subject: The Purpose of "500" Numbers Date: 7 Nov 1996 16:13:46 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) Has anyone ever heard of something called a "500" number available from ATT? What is it? Why would someone want one? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T 500 numbers are sometimes known as 'Follow Me' numbers. They are quite versatile. The owner has a PIN which allows him to program three numbers to which calls will be forwarded. AT&T then looks for him at those three numbers in the order he specifies each time a call comes in. The owner specifies if incoming calls via his 500 number are to be paid for by the caller or if they are to be received collect, in which case he gives out a PIN to the callers allowed to call him via the 500 number with auto- matic reverse charge. It can all be tied to voicemail of the owner's choosing or voicemail provided by AT&T. 500 numbers are basically the same as the older 700 numbers, except that the caller does not need to use the AT&T code 10288 on the front of the dialing string. This service is good for people who travel a lot and are likely to be at various numbers but who do not want to have to give out a bunch of numbers to people likely to call them. The owner simply programs the 500 number to ring at the place he is located at the time. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #602 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 7 19:34:30 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id TAA26364; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 19:34:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 19:34:30 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611080034.TAA26364@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #603 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Nov 96 19:34:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 603 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Govt Alleges United Payphones, Teletek Stock Scam (Tad Cook) Book Review: "NetLearning: Why Teachers Use the Internet" (Rob Slade) Universal Service Debate Online Friday, November 8 (Stephen Messer) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (David Richards) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (Edward Shuck) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (Todd L. Sherman) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (Paul Wallich) Re: Help! Need Multi-Fax Receive Software (Robert A. Book) Symplex DR-1 For Sale (Geoff Williams) Re: Problems With Long Distance Directory (Lou Jahn) Top 10 Signs Your Company Has Been Taken Over By BT (Tom Trottier) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Govt Alleges United Payphones, Teletek Stock Scam Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:50:03 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Grand Jury Indicts 19 in Vegas Stock Scam LAS VEGAS (AP) -- A federal grand jury has indicted 19 stock promoters, brokers and officials linked to two Las Vegas companies in connection with a multimillion-dollar stock scheme. A 52-count indictment alleges securities fraud, wire fraud and money laundering. It was issued against five people who at one time held key positions with Teletek Inc. or United Payphones Inc. In a separate 27-count indictment, 14 other people, many of them East Coast stockbrokers and financial consultants, were charged with conspiracy, securities fraud, wire fraud and, in some cases, money laundering. The racketeering indictment, revealed Wednesday, alleges former Teletek officials Michael Swan, Keith Shwayder and Kevin Orton represented to investors that the company's income was derived from business operations with "no mention of the funding being received from the fraudulent sale of securities." It also said company stock was issued to "assist in bribing stockbrokers to provide fraudulent sources of funds," and investors were not told of "hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional income" being provided to Swan or his wife, co-defendant Claudia Higgins. Also named in the 52-count indictment was Steven Wertman, a stock promoter from New York. Some of the bribes were paid to stockbrokers in cash hidden in Federal Express packages. In one instance, Swan is alleged to have had a former secretary deliver $15,000 cash to the husband of a stockbroker at a Las Vegas airport, the U.S. attorney's office said. The indictment said millions of shares of stock were transferred. An employee of Teletek said neither Swan nor Higgins worked for the company and she had not heard of the other three names in the racketeering indictment. William McLucas, the Securities and Exchange Commission's director of enforcement, called the investigation a "major step in law enforcement's intensive ... efforts to address the problem of kickbacks in the securities industry." The indictment said the scheme took place over four years beginning in late 1991. Among the allegations: --Brokers and promoters were bribed with "millions of dollars of cash and stock to sell millions of shares," and officers engaged in insider trading while manipulating the price and volume of the stock. --The companies filed false annual and quarterly reports, registration statements and other public documents. --Company officers laundered proceeds of the scheme, which was carried out in at least 10 states. The indictment said that in December 1991, Swan, who was also president and director of United Payphones, met in Las Vegas with various stockbrokers. It was at this and subsequent meetings, according to prosecutors, that the agreement to bribe brokers in exchange for stock sales was hammered out. The fraudulent activity is alleged to have continued from November 1991 to December 1995, and to have included bribing stockbrokers in Nevada, California, Utah, Colorado, Texas, New York, New Jersey, Florida, Illinois and Oklahoma. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 18:33:18 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "NetLearning: Why Teachers Use the Internet" BKNETLRN.RVW 960721 "NetLearning: Why Teachers Use the Internet", Ferdi Serim/Melissa Koch, 1996, 1-56592-201-8, U$24.95/C$35.95 %A Ferdi Serim %A Melissa Koch %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1996 %G 1-56592-201-8 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$24.95/C$35.95 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 292 %T "NetLearning: Why Teachers Use the Internet" A quote, on page 112, regarding project planning is telling. "From our experience, it takes as much time [to plan an Internet related activity] as any well-thought-out project." In other words, the Internet is no magic panacea for education, regardless of how excited you may be about it. It takes time, it takes work, it takes research, and it takes a thorough knowledge of the net and its tools before you can produce something of quality. Simply sticking the Internet name on will not cover up your deficiencies. The authors of this book should have kept that in mind from the start. Although different in format, this work is very similar to FARNET's "51 Reasons" (cf. BK51RESN.RVW) in style, content, and concept. The material is limited and repetitious, with reiterated stories of email penpals and online research. The details of searching or directed study are almost completely lacking, reinforcing the image of the Internet as a place where learning, if it takes place at all, is completely serendipitous. There is some value in the brief overview of Internet applications, plus marginal notes on Web sites and other resources referred to in the stories. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKNETLRN.RVW 960721 Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@freenet.victoria.bc.ca link to virus, book info at http://www.freenet.victoria.bc.ca/techrev/rms.html Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Stephen Messer Subject: Universal Service Debate Online Friday, November 8 Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 14:30:14 -0800 Organization: The Columbia Institute for Tele-Information On Friday, November 8 Federal-State Joint Board Announces its Universal Service Recommendations: 4pm-6pm Join a discussion with Top telecom disscuants to discuss the Joint Federal-State board recommendations on Universal Service. New York, New York -- On July 13, 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)"... seeking comments on proposals and policy changes to improve ... assistance mechanisms intended to provide funds necessary to promote universally available service at reasonable rates." On Friday, November 8 the results of this effort will be released. Immediately afterwards, from 4pm to 6pm, top academics, industry and government officials who are prominent in the Universal Service arena will convene on-line to initiate a live discussion on the recommendation which will then be opened to the public. The program will be moderated by Professor Milton Mueller of Rutgers University, a noted scholar on the subject. Full text of the recommendation, submissions to the FCC, links to other sites and articles, expert responses, biographies, contact information, and much more will be available. The Virtual Institute of Information will host the discussion. The V.I.I. is an on-line think tank and research library devoted to telecommunications, computing, and mass media. With more than 7,000 links, The V.I.I. has become one of the most comprehensive on-line industry sources. Join in the discussion at : http://www.ctr.columbia.edu/vii/univsvce Among 30 invited discussants are: Eli Noam,Columbia; Greg Rosston,FCC; Fred Gumper, NYNEX; Barbara Cherry,Ameritech; Andrew Blau,Benton Foundation; Jorge Schement,Penn State; Charles Firestone,Aspen Institute; Henry Geller,The Markle Foundation; Albert Vann,NY State Assembly,Telecommuniactions and Energy Committee; Susan Ness, FCC; Steve Wildman,Northwestern; Joe Lubin,AT&T; Monroe Price,Cardozo; and many more ... Stephen Messer The Columbia Institute for Tele-Information, http://www.ctr.columbia.edu/citi The Virtual Institute of Informaiton, http://www.ctr.columbia.edu/vii smesser@claven.gsb.columbia.edu sdm28@columbia.edu Phone: 212-854-4222 Fax: 212-932-7816 ------------------------------ From: dr@ripco.com (David Richards) Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Organization: Ripco Internet BBS Chicago Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 16:29:16 GMT Charging by the 'hit' is unfair. A 'hit' is one connection, the server could send one byte or one million. What's being sent (HTML, zip or .jpg) also has little impact on the server. What bogs down a server are lots and lots of hits on small files, or even just a few hits on really big files. The solution is to base overuse policies on 'bandwidth' used rather than connections seen. In article , Todd L. Sherman wrote: > I was shocked to view the South Fla. Scanning and DX'ing web page, > only to see a NOTICE by the web page author advising its users that > the author's page would be shut DOWN after every 5000 hits, because of > a "pay-per-hit" fee his ISP is suddenly hitting them with! Can you > believe this? An ISP is actually charging its users for the number of > HITS to their own pages? Do many OTHER ISP's do this, too? I've > never heard of this before! There has to be some restriction on the amount of traffic users's pages do, lest they clog up the server. For example, Glen Roberts of Full Disclosure is one of our users. His page was mentioned (with URL) on the front page of section 2 of the {Wall Street Journal}. From the day it appeared through today, hits to his web pages made up 20% of the hits to personal home page server, and about 18% of the bytes sent from that server (his pages tend to be smaller than average). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are some ISPs who count the hits > and say that after a given number of hits in a certain period of time > you will be considered a commercial customer rather than just an > individual user (with the additional costs which applies to company > accounts, etc). I do not know of any that charge per actual hit. PAT] Without a limit you'll end up in a situation like Netcom's a year or so ago, where users had multi-megabyte freeware distributions, huge archives of X-rated images, and other extremely popular material, clogging their public-FTP servers such that nobody could get anything in or out. David Richards Ripco, since Nineteen-Eighty-Three My opinions are my own, Public Access in Chicago But they are available for rental Shell/SLIP/PPP/UUCP/ISDN/Leased dr@ripco.com (312) 665-0065 !Free Usenet/E-Mail! ------------------------------ From: edshuck@best.com (Edward Shuck) Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Date: Wed, 06 Nov 1996 00:23:32 GMT Organization: Visual Traffic Reply-To: edshuck@visual-traffic.com One ISP that does what Pat indicates is Best.com (my provider). Details can be had at http://www.best.com. The 5k number seems very small. I need 50k a day to move to commercial rate. Edward Shuck edshuck@visual-traffic.com Visual Traffic http://www.visual-traffic.com Telephone Traffic Analysis/Phreaker & Telabuse Abatement ------------------------------ From: Todd L. Sherman Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:43:28 -0500 On 7 Nov 1996, Rahul Dhesi wrote: >> I do not know of any that charge per actual hit. PAT > Now you do. From our new rate schedule: > Monthly charge for exceeding scaled hits: > $5 per 50,000 excess scaled hits/day in units of $5. > Monthly charge for exceeding megabyte volume: > $50 per 50 excess megabytes/day in units of $50. > It's not as bad as it sounds, since some number of hits and megabytes > are included in the base rate. Not too bad at all, compared to the 5000 hits limit at the other site I mentioned. THAT'S more acceptable, and harder to surpass (your's, that is.) The only people I can see surpassing that would be commercial co's. Todd ------------------------------ From: pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Date: 7 Nov 1996 11:26:41 -0500 Organization: Trivializers R Us In Todd L. Sherman writes: > I was shocked to view the South Fla. Scanning and DX'ing web page, > only to see a NOTICE by the web page author advising its users that > the author's page would be shut DOWN after every 5000 hits, because of > a "pay-per-hit" fee his ISP is suddenly hitting them with! Can you > believe this? An ISP is actually charging its users for the number of > HITS to their own pages? Do many OTHER ISP's do this, too? I've > never heard of this before! > See www.shadow.net for the culprit service. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are some ISPs who count the hits > and say that after a given number of hits in a certain period of time > you will be considered a commercial customer rather than just an > individual user (with the additional costs which applies to company > accounts, etc). I do not know of any that charge per actual hit. PAT] I know of at least one ISP that charges on the basis of the amount of information transferred: the first 60MB or so each month are free, and then a small per-megabyte charge kicks in. Since bandwidth is what ISP's are supplying (and paying people for) it seems only reasonably that at some point they should pass the costs on to the people who generate them. Flat rate is nice in some ways, but usually it means that the smaller users subsidize the bigger ones. paul ------------------------------ From: Robert A. Book Subject: Re: Help! Need Multi-Fax Receive Software Organization: University of Chicago Grad. School of Business Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 21:31:16 GMT Larry Rachman, WA2BUX 74066.2004@compuserve.com wrote: > Does anyone out there know of an off-the-shelf application for a PC > that will collect incoming faxes from several modems (2-16) and print > them to one or more laser printers as they arrive. I've got a client > dependant upon a now-obsolete product called 'jetfax' that turned an > HP laserjet into a fax machine. Now, he needs more, can't get them, > and does't want to replace his two laserjets with a room full of fax > machines. Why can't you just run several "copies" of a standard fax program, each looking at a different modem (i.e., a different COM: port), and have each program configured to automatically print the faxes as they come in? Am I missing something here? It should be legal, by the way, to install multiple copies of the same software on the same machine without buying extra copies. Of course, if you need 16 faxmodems, you might need two machines, so you'd need to buy two copies, but not 16. Robert Book rbook@uchicago.edu University of Chicago ------------------------------ From: Geoff Williams Subject: Symplex DR-1 For Sale Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 15:56:47 -0500 Organization: Thorn Communications Thorn Communications is offering a Symplex DR-1 ISDN Router for sale. If you're interested, please contact us at info@thorn.net, or call (212) 480-3680. Geoff Williams Thorn Communications ------------------------------ Date: 07 Nov 96 13:53:03 EST From: Lou Jahn <71233.2444@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Problems With Long Distance Directory In TD Vol #594 Ken Jongsma mentioned the cost of air time relative to Cellular directory assistance. > It would seem that there is a business opportunity here: The LECs > should be marketing their "genuine" directory services. There is a difference between LandLine and Cellular DA service focus. Efficency as measured by Average Work Time (AWT) of operators, accuracy and provided services are but a few, however, one must remember the Cellular Carriers are "Unregulated" or maybe "less-regulated" versus traditional Landline LECs. AWT is a major focus on traditional LEC DA service. Operator labor generally represents well over 50% of the cost to provide DA service. On Cellular DA services there is far less concern on the operator cost hence AWT as the Carrier captures greater AirTime revenues which offset the additional labor cost with longer AWTs. It is justified under the guise of better "Customer Service". Accuracy: This is major problem and one both the FCC and PUCs must work to relieve. It is not something the Cellular Carrier or their DA provider can fix without RBOC assistance. The basic issue is most RBOCs refuse to license the use of their subscriber listings to Alternate DA providers. Hence the Alt. DA provider uses scanned versions of the White Page directories. These DBs suffer from both scanning as well as Directory Ageing problems. The T/C Act mandates that thr RBOCs provide the listings to CLECs etc, however every RBOC legal team reads the words differently so as to assure they can delay following the law (and hopefully trade-off providing the listings as part of a rate negotiated settlement). Services: Cellular use by its pure nature is different than traditional LandLine telephony. It represents more willingness to pay for discretionary expenditures (mostly due to business write-offs). Hence Cellular DA service finds a greater willingness to pay for call completion and/or for finding "Yellow Page" like category searches - say to find a selected type of resturant near 5th and Vine. Again these types of services take more time than the average AWT for 411 DA (which is approximately 20-22 seconds). Again the longer Air TImes and air-revenue provides some of the economics missing under your basic DA service. Lastly, and as importantly is the cost of Cellular DA versus traditional DA services. The fee for NPA-555-1212 was orginally set under the 1984 ruling and was arbitrarily chosen at the time as 75 cents per call, today most IXC firms charge 85-90 cents per NPA-555-1212 call. At the time this was to cover the transport plus 411 charges. Most 411 subscriber charges are set by State PUCs without regard to the cost of the service. For instance, US West gets 60 cents per 411 call, Bell of PA gets 57 cents per 411 yet NJ Bell must provide 6 free calls and after that only gets 20 cents per 411 call in NJ (35 cents for Business Callers). Most analyst believe that the true cost is in the 50 cents per call range. However, you will have a hard time finding any Cellular Carrier charging similar low rates for Directory Assistance. Most bundle the DA with Call Completion (and do not mention Air Time) to perpetuate the "service" aspect of the delivery. The additional call completion function adds very little to the toal cost - yet sounds complex and the net result are fees that generate Cellular profits from DA while RBOCs suffer losses in providing basic DA. Also - yet to be heard of complaint! The area code confusion and proilferation adds costs to many callers. If you dial 415-5551212 and the area code number/service you need is 408-555-1212, most IXC's still charge the 85-90 cents to your bill. Nobody seems worried of callers lost fee's due to the NANP complexity. This one area the Aternate DA providers fix as they will provide any State any area code from the same Operator Position. Lou Jahn Listing Services Solutions Inc. 609-702-8232 / 609-702-8240 FAX Lumberton, NJ 08048 71233.2444@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: Tom Trottier Date: 7 Nov 96 16:14:09 MST Subject: Top 10 Signs Your Company Has Been Taken Over By BT 10. That black thing on your desk is referred to as the "tellie" (MCI'ers all have black tvs, I guess); 9. When you miss the plan, someone named Sir screams, "this whole thing is a bloody mess"; 8. Benny Hill replaces Whoopi as the company spokesperson; 7. "God Save the Queen" is the new company motto; 6. 1-800-COLLECT has been changed to 1-800-FERGIE; 5. Tea and Crumpet breaks at 2 and 4 pm daily; 4. That big Christmas bonus is converted to Pounds; 3. 1-800-MUSICNOW sells only Beatle 8-tracks; 2. Bass is on tap in the cafeteria; 1. Lady Di screen savers for everyone! Tom Trottier - tom@act.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #603 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 7 21:10:33 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id VAA06131; Thu, 7 Nov 1996 21:10:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 21:10:33 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611080210.VAA06131@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #604 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Nov 96 21:10:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 604 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits (Bruce Bartram) Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits (Richard Kenshalo) Re: Help! Need Multi-Fax Receive Software (John Dearing) Re: NYNEX to Adopt Uniform Reach Numbers For Repair Service (N. Andersson) Re: Phone Access/Internet Saturation? (Nils Andersson) Re: Any Cord Switchboards Left in Service? (Lou Jahn) Employment Opportunity (Mark Horning) Developers and Systems Admins Needed For Chicago Area (trajan@megsinet.net) Re: Company-Specific Area Codes in the UK? (Michael Wengler) Re: New Virus Warning (Bob Niland) Re: FCC Decision: Cable Entry Into Telphony (Howard Stapleton) Bellcore Updates Web Page ... Sorta (John Cropper) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network (Paul Robinson) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network (Isaac Wingfield) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: bwb@etl.noaa.gov (Bruce Bartram) Subject: Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits Date: 8 Nov 1996 00:09:29 GMT Organization: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder A few minor notes/corrections on Kenneth Becker's answer. 1) I think the GPS system is timed from the Falcon Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, CO. The timing is a slave system off the US Naval Observatory master site near Washington, DC. http://tycho.usno.navy.mil is a nice set of pages. NIST (formerly NBS) in Boulder, CO keeps a separate master clock system. I expect there is a complete science of keeping the various master clocks in the world all synched. 2) My simple CSU/DSU has a local clock option that I had to use to make my data T1 (17 miles of US West) work. I found that the T1 is carried on a higher multiplex system and I needed to be within 50 ppm or 50 bits/second (I forget which) and the CSU/DSU local clock was spec'ed to be able to do that. Since these boxes were under $ 1k, I'd limit my solutions to about that amount, if the attached equipment is also happy with that level of accuracy. Bruce Bartram bbartram@etl.noaa.gov NOAA Boulder, CO usual disclaimers apply ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 07:34:37 -0800 From: Richard Kenshalo Organization: MTA Subject: Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits Bob Izenberg wrote: > Our regional telco isn't providing clocking on local area T1s. > The Ascend Pipeline 130s that we use on some of our circuits need a > stable clocking source and can't provide it themselves. One of our > options, which some will no doubt advocate, is forgetting all about > the P130s in favor of another vendor ... we're doing that. In the > meantime, I'd like to hear from anyone who's providing a clock source > for devices that need it but cannot derive it from the data line to > which they are connected, or from an internal source. It is hard to believe that the telco can't provide clocking on T1s. If they aren't doing any network synchronization, they can't provide any DDS services or SS7 signaling. If their T1s come from a DACS, there is a good chance they are synchronized to a primary reference. You might inquire again, and simply set your P130s to loop or recovered timing. To answer your question better, there are a number of low (?) cost GPS receivers available these days that provide a primary reference (Stratum 1) synchronization source. FTS-Austron makes a PRR-10, that I use to sync our telco offices in a distributed timing network. Is it possible to purchase your T1s from someone else if you can't provide your own clocking? Richard Kenshalo Matanuska Telephone Association Palmer, Alaska ------------------------------ From: jdearing@netaxs.com (John Dearing) Subject: Re: Help! Need Multi-Fax Receive Software Date: 7 Nov 1996 17:44:31 GMT Organization: Philadelphia's Complete Internet Provider Lawrence Rachman (74066.2004@CompuServe.COM) wrote: > Does anyone out there know of an off-the-shelf application for a PC > that will collect incoming faxes from several modems (2-16) and print > them to one or more laser printers as they arrive. I've got a client > dependant upon a now-obsolete product called 'jetfax' that turned an > HP laserjet into a fax machine. Now, he needs more, can't get them, > and does't want to replace his two laserjets with a room full of fax > machines. Does Practical Perpiherals still make the FaxMe card? It plugged into the left hand font cart slot on a LaserJet II or III and let the printer do double duty as a receive-only Fax machine. They were pretty inexpensive and worked rather well as I recall. Don't know if they ever upgraded them for newer series LaserJets. John Dearing : Philadelphia Area Computer Society IBM SIG President Email : jdearing@netaxs.com U.S.Snail : 46 Oxford Drive, Langhorne PA 19047 (USA) Voice Phone : +1.215.757.8803 (after 5pm Eastern) ------------------------------ From: Nilsphone@aol.com Subject: Re: NYNEX to Adopt Uniform Reach Numbers For Repair Service Date: 7 Nov 1996 18:04:59 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Dave Perrussel writes: > Many places that have 611 for the number for repair service also have > a seven-digit number (local to those in that particular telco) or an > 1-800 or 1-888 number for those outside the telco. I agree that a local quick dial (611 and its brethren) is fine as long as there is also a POTN (Plain old telephone number) that can be reached from ANYWHERE! 800 and 888 numbers still fail this test, as they cannot be reached from outside the U.S. (The truly telco adept can finesse this by calling e.g. an AT&T access number in the local country etc etc, but nobody should have to depend on this). Note that I can be outside the U.S. and find that some local exchange in the US has a problem! ------------------------------ From: Nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Phone Access/Internet Saturation? Date: 7 Nov 1996 18:05:02 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Victor Shvetsky writes: >> minutes I caught at the end, he (the CEO) made the statement that 2/3 >> of the world's population LIVE AND DIE WITHOUT EVER MAKING OR >> RECEIVING _ONE_ TELEPHONE CALL ... 2/3! > Question is, do they really need the phone? I mean, we sure try to > make this ATM-over-Satellite business that would allow us multi-gadget > "multimedia", but if any of you have travelled in areas of "most > population" -- why would they need it when there are more simple > things that will not be there for at least hundreds of years? It is > one thing to provide mobile service to current users, but it is > totally different providing it to people who really have no need for > it YET. > Now, I know it sounds a bit prejudice, it isn't -- like a government- > sponsored billboard in India in front of the McDonald's says - "Say no > to Potato Chips and Yes to Computer Chips". What this global phone for > the masses is like is potato chips -- you can eat them, but is it good > to? Small note: "Chips" or "Potato Chips" in British (and presumably Indian) English = "French Fries" in American English. (U.S. "chips" are "crisps" to an Englishman). >> Given the current population growth rate and the current expansion rate >> of the internet, when will the total population be wired? > Once again, WHY? A fear of losing another Balsac? Why "wiring" the > whole lpopulation? Providing an ability -- maybe, a right -- definitely > not. > Here in Japan, they got this thing, called PHS -- cellular phone only > cheaper. It was such a hit that almost eveyrone is Tokyo uses them > now. The problem is, it REALLY interrupts your lifestyle! How many > of you, eating at the table having a conversation, would suddenly > stop, ignore the person you just asked a question, and turn to someone > else? Sure, on a date maybe! But, with cell phone, it is definitely > TOO much. We flip the phone, cut the current conversation, making > our partner pretend like he/she is not listening (I guess, he/she > might as well be counting the oxygen molecules trying to fill up the > time whle you talk) and start the new one on the phone. > The point is, we take this hype about technology WAY too much. > Technology is great, it should definitely enhance our lives, but > interrupt it? > So, once again -- why WIRE all the masses? Oooh, the paternalism of it all. The truth is much better and much worse than you think. The "need" for anything beyond a very minimum sustenance lies in the mind of the needer, i.e. it is subjective. By this definition, I can "need" almost anything (certainly including a private jet), and so can you, but it is not for either of us to tell the other what he needs. In business, there is a different (but very practical) definition of "need", although the word usually used is "demand". There is a "demand" for anything that a customer is willing to pay for. In extremis, by this definition a starving person does not "need" or at least not "demand" food unless he has money in his pocket. Suggesting that peoples living in poverty do not "need" phones may be true, sort of, in the sense that most of them do not lie awake at night thinking "I wish I had a phone". Suggesting, as you do, that they are better off without them is probably untrue; one of the reasons they are poor is that they live in a subsistence economy (although traditional Western money-based measures of poverty break down entirely when facing a subsistence economy; saying that somebody lives on USD 200 a year says something about his ability to buy industrial goods, but nothing about how well or badly he really lives - maybe he is starving to death, or maybe he can pluck all his food and necessary clothing from a munificient nature with no problems). In reality, what will happen in many poor regions (from fairly "capitalistic" ones to Mainland China) is that the wired telephone stage will be largely skipped, it is cheaper and quicker to use various cellular or cellular-style (DECT e.g. ) technologies that do not depend on stringing wire (copper wire is expensive to install, and makes nice bracelets when polished...) Various companies will offer phone service. In poor areas, the initial customers will be businesses, including small businesses. What proportion of people will bring their phones to the dinner table will depend on their individual choices (not yours, or mine), as it does in the parts of the world that are industrialized of old. The threat of having their privacy interrupted by a phone call (cellular or otherwise) at the dinner table does not weigh heavily on the huddled masses of the world. Nils Andersson ------------------------------ Date: 07 Nov 96 13:53:06 EST From: Lou Jahn <71233.2444@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Any Cord Switchboards Left in Service? Lisa posed the question and as of March of 1995 I can say yes. My firm undertook a review of Telcom Haiti for the World Bank and low and behold they have bank of six cord boards in their toll center. While they have as well a PC based solution, three of the cord boards were still used on high traffic situations (the other three served as parts supply for the three pressed into operation). In addition, they still used the old approach of toll tickets to measure the length and cost of toll calls (mostly going overseas from toll call store front operations run by the telco). You requested the number at a cashier like booth. When the toll operators connected it you were told which telephone booth to use for the call. At the completion the toll operators give the time and rate to the cashier who deducts the true charge from a deposit made when placing the call. Sounds archic against our operations, however when measured against the very poor and limited resources for TeleCom Haiti and the nation, their overall system ran effectively. We even heard the drone of the step-switches operating in one CO basement ... yet mixed with DMS-10s in remote areas their service was quite good considering ot suffered thru an embargo and much more. Lou Jahn Listing Services Solutions, Inc 71233.2444@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: Mark Horning Subject: Employment Opportunity: Chief Engineer, Telecom Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 19:36:09 -0500 Organization: IPR Reply-To: mhorning@erols.com Job Title: Chief Engineer, Telecommunications Infrastructure Salary Range:$60-$90K Location: East Coast(not NYC), relo package avail. Position Summary: Overall engineering responsibility for outside plant and transmission telecom infrastructure access services. The engineering services include engineering, contractor services, construction supervision, acceptance, chosen technology and network planning. Infrastructure facilities include: fiber optic, wireless, coaxial, and telephone cable systems. This is a new start up venture with parts already in place. If you are interested, please contact me for more information. My firm has been retained by this organization to recruit for this position. There are no fees. Mark Horning Staff-Net 11718 Bowman Green Drive Reston, VA 20190 703-318-4105 FAX 318-9121 Email mhorning@erols.com ------------------------------ From: trajan@megsinet.net Subject: Developers and Systems Admins Needed for Chicago area Date: 7 Nov 1996 03:41:03 GMT Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service Recruiting for the following computer professionals: 1) Windows NT Systems Administrator 2) Unix Systems Administrator 3) C/Unix Oracle Developer 4) Oracle DBA You must have at least one year work experience working for a U.S. business or government agency, excellent communications skills, and a willingness to work in the Chicago area. Respond to me at trajan@megsinet.net. You may attach a resume in Word Perfect, MS Word, or text format. ------------------------------ From: Michael Wengler Subject: Re: Company-Specific Area Codes in the UK? Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 15:56:28 -0800 Organization: QUALCOMM, Incorporated; San Diego, CA, USA Heck, the US government has been auctioning radio spectrum ... Why not auction off numbering space? Retire the US national debt that way, augment North Sea oil income in Britain ... ------------------------------ From: rjn@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Bob Niland) Subject: Re: New Virus Warning Date: 7 Nov 1996 17:09:51 GMT Organization: Colorado SuperNet Reply-To: rjn@csn.net Tim Dillman (0006540276@mcimail.com) wrote: > RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS: Do not download and/or execute any file named > PKZ300B.EXE/ZIP. The most current release of PKZip from PKWARE Inc., > is PKZ204G. exe which is available via anonymous FTP from pkware.com > (IP 198.137.186.90) in the /pub/pkware directory. If you have a copy > of the counterfeit PKZip utility, please contact ASSIST as soon as > possible. PKware is now advertising a release 2.5, presumably file name PKZ250x.EXE. Don't assume that any file with a number higher than 204 is a virus vector. Regards, 1001-A East Harmony Road Bob Niland Suite 503 Internet: rjn@sni.net Fort Collins Colorado 80525 USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 11:11:36 -0800 From: Howard Stapleton Subject: Re: FCC Decision: Cable Entry Into Telephony An article from Neal McLain in Digest V16 #598 included the following statement in discussing the FCC preliminary decision in a case where Hill City and Bogue, Kansas refused to issue a telecommunications franchise to Classic Telephone: "In most states, telecommunications franchises are issued at the state level." I was under the impression that the majority of states allowed local governments to franchise as a means of receiving compensation for use of public ROW. Can anyone clarify this for me? Howard Stapleton City of San Diego (619) 533-4758 hps@citymgr.sannet.gov ------------------------------ From: psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) Subject: BellCore Updates Web Page ... Sorta Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 19:53:41 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com BellCore's monthly update took place on the afternoon of the seventh, with a few surprises, but lacking in other areas ... 313 Michigan: 734 announced as split code for areas outside of Detroit 908 New Jersey: 732 added, but with no info (we already know 5/1/97 and 11/1/97) 201 New Jersey: 973 added, but with no info (we already know 5/1/97 and 11/1/97) 425 Washington: Test number of 425-452-0009 added 253 Washington: Test number of 253-627-0062 added No mention of the test number for 440, the new 615 split (931), nor the 415 (650), 916 (530), or 818 (626). Kinda makes you wonder why some LECs (BA, PacBell, BellSouth) just dump the code info into the public domain at the drop of a hat, while others (Ameritech) are as tight-lipped as BellCore (at times) with the relief information. John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 fax: 609.637.9430 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 21:35:51 -0400 From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: cats8@erols.com Organization: Evergreen Software Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Nils Andersson wrote: > scott miller writes: >> Dial-up data traffic has been getting a free ride on the Telco >> voice network for years. >> That is coming to an end. The question is, who is going to pay? > Nonsense! While the statistics are different, a data link pays the > same per-minute charge (at least) as a voice call. If there was a > per-call charge, this claim might have had some validity, but the > local RBOCs charge per minute, in most cases. Here in Bell Atlantic country, you can get calls in three flavors of charges: (1) Untimed, unlimited calling (residential and centrex only) (2) 10c per call (technically 9.9c per call) untimed (3) 3c for the first minute, 1c each additional minute Our home line was originally on 10c per call (you get 65 calls free) but, because I am sending a lot of faxes while looking for work (I'm currently unemployed), I had to switch to unlimited calling after running up $85.00 in toll charges one month (more than 900 faxes). So not everyone is timed. Paul Robinson (formerly PAUL@TDR.COM) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 09:10:24 -0800 From: isw@hdvs.com (Isaac Wingfield) Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Clayton E. Cramer wrote: > The telcos are doing their best to implement ADSL, but genuine > commercial products are still a few months away from deployment. My > colleagues in our Engineering Department would tell you all about > this, but they are too busy getting the products put together. > If you read the ADSL RFPs from the telcos (as I do), you can tell > that they are very serious about this. If you had read the RFPs for Bell Atlantic's video dial tone service a few years ago (as I did), you could tell that they were very serious about that, too. It was later on that they lost interest, after my company and others had invested large sums of money to develop devices which they wound up purchasing only small quantities of ... Isaac Wingfield Staff System Engineer isw@hdvs.com Hyundai Digital Video Systems Vox: 408-232-8530 3103 N. First Street Fax: 408-232-8145 San Jose, CA 95134 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #604 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 8 10:35:06 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA25157; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 10:35:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 10:35:06 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611081535.KAA25157@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #605 TELECOM Digest Fri, 8 Nov 96 10:35:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 605 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Announcement - Warning to Crypto and Banking Communities (Monty Solomon) Worldwide Interconnects/Installers (Ed Hogan) Re: Typos in Lucent Television Commercials (Bradley Ward Allen) Re: Tennessee Split (Paul Robinson) Re: Tennessee Split (Linc Madison) Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN (Linc Madison) Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN (Mark W. Schumann) Re: Pacific Bell/PCS/San Diego (Mike King) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Jim St. John) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Last Laugh! 666 Exchange and Disgruntled Subcribers (Mike Fox) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 6 Nov 1996 03:52:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Announcement - Warning to Crypto and Banking Communities Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 18:16:37 -0500 From: Ross Anderson (by way of Bruce Schneier) Subject: Announcement - Warning to Crypto and Banking Communities A serious weakness of DES Draft - 2nd November 1996 Abstract Eli Biham and Adi Shamir recently pointed out that if an attacker can induce unidirectional faults in key memory of cryptographic devices, then keys could be extracted quickly. Although their attack is very elegant, it is not practical against many fielded systems. For example, inducing a single bit change in a DES key will cause a proper implementation to return a key parity error. However, when combined with Peter Gutman's recent work on memory remanence, there are two very practical attacks. One of them allows smartcard electronic wallet keys to be extracted with much less expensive equipment than that currently used by pay-TV pirates; the other yields an effective attack against fielded banking security modules. These attacks show that a feature of DES that had long been thought innocuous is actually a serious design error. Introduction In a research announcement of 30th October, Biham and Shamir point out that if a cryptographic hardware module employes EEPROM for key memory only, an opponent who can turn EEPROM values from `1' to `0' with a small controlled probability (e.g., by applying UV light) might cause a test input to be encrypted with a series of keys, each of Hamming distance one from the next in the series, and ending with the all zero key [1]. There are a number of reasons why their attack is not likely to work against real systems. For example, the typical smartcard system has several kilobytes of program code in EEPROM as well as typically two to five DES keys. An undirected stress applied to such a card is more likely to cause a program crash or an uninformative error than to yield a ciphertext encrypted under a key at Hamming distance one from a genuine key. Even if we only had to cause a hundred cards to fail to get a single input for the Biham-Shamir attack, if we needed on average 28 inputs to recover a DES key, then the number of cards required could be O(100^28). The situation is made still worse by the fact that DES keys have odd parity, and a proper implementation will reject a key if any of its bytes has even parity. So one would be reduced to looking for keys at a Hamming distance of two rather than one. It is this objection that inspired the following work. A Modified Attack My idea is to turn the DES key parity problem on its head and enable parity to help rather than hinder the attack. Let us first consider an opponent who can perform directed attacks on the chip. Reading the contents of an EEPROM cell directly is difficult, and people who do it for a living use focused ion beam workstations to modify the chip [2]. However, it is trivial to set an EEPROM cell to the value of your choice if you do not have to read it first; you only need two microprobes. A 10mS 18V pulse from the cell's source to its control gate will do the trick [3]. My modified attack therefore proceeds as follows. Set the first bit of the EEPROM containing the target DES key to 1 (or 0, the choice doesn't matter) and operate the device. If it still works, the keybit was a 1. If you get a `key parity error' message, then the bit was zero. Move on to the next bit; set it to 1 and see if this changes the device's response (from encryption to error or vice versa). This is a practical attack even on chips whose software we do not know in detail, as many smartcard software writers seem to have adopted a convention that the keys are located at the bottom end of the EEPROM memory. It will also work with protocols that use redundancy which we do not understand: we just change each key bit back to its original value. The use of predictable memory addresses for keys is not restricted to smartcards; many banking security modules also keep keys at low memory. I will now describe a related attack that extracts master keys from these modules. An Attack on Fielded Systems In a brilliant Usenix paper [4], Peter Gutman described the mechanisms that cause both static and dynamic RAM to `remember' values that they have stored for a long period of time. A prudent security engineer will ask what the effect of this is in the real world. I looked at an instance of a security module used in banking. This security module has 12 pairs of DES master keys stored in low memory. The device is tamper resistant in that power to the key memory is cut when the box is opened for servicing (this is needed every few years to change the battery). Keys are loaded into the device afterwards in multiple components by trusted bank staff. In this device, which dated from the late 1980's, the key values were substantially intact on power-up. The number of bits in error was of the order of 5-10%. I cannot give more accurate figures as I was not permitted to copy down either the correct master key values, nor the almost-correct values that had been `burned in' to the static RAM chips. I am also not permitted to name the bank at which these modules are installed, and it may not be prudent to name their manufacturer. Nonetheless the crypto community should consider the consequences. If each DES key is wrong by five bits, then the effort involved in seaching for the 10 wrong bits in a double DES key might be thought to be 112-choose-10 operations. Each operation would involve (a) doing a 2-key 3DES decryption of a 64 bit PIN key whose enciphered value is widely known to the bank's programmers (b) in the 2^{-8} of cases where this result has odd parity, enciphering an account number with this as a DES key to see if the (decimalised) result is the corresponding PIN. The effort is 4 times 112-choose-10 DES operations - about 2^50. But it would probably be cheaper to do a hardware keysearch on the PIN key directly than to try to implement this more complex 2^50 search in either hardware or software. However, the bytewise nature of the DES key redundancy reduces the effort by orders of magnitude. If no key byte has a double error, then the effort is seven tries for each even parity byte observed, or 7^10 - about 2^28, which is easy. If there is one key byte with a double error, the effort is 2^38, giving a search of 2^40 DES operations - which is still feasible for an individual. Conclusions I have shown that the key parity in DES enables us to slash the cost of real attacks on both old systems (banking security modules) and new ones (electronic wallet smartcards). I had already mentioned in [5] that a common fault in the driver software for banking security modules was that `key parity error' messages were often ignored rather than copied to the bank's security manager to give warning of an attempted attack. This note shows that key parity is even more serious than that. The nature of DES key redundancy now appears to be a design error; it would have been much better to calculate the redundancy on the whole key. The 16 bit MAC used in the Clipper and Capstone chips is preferable (although as shown in [6], 16 bits may not be enough to prevent some protocol attacks). The lesson for bankers is that existing security modules (and other cryptographic devices) should be destroyed carefully at the end of their working life. The lesson for security engineers is that we should add key redundancy, and the question of whether we can rely on a device's eventual destruction, to the growing list of system parameters that must be (a) explicitly considered during design and (b) examined carefully when the product is being evaluated. Bibliography [1] ``The Next Stage of Differential Fault Analysis: How to break completely unknown cryptosystems'', Eli Biham, Adi Shamir, October 30th, 1996 [2] ``Tamper Resistance - A Cautionary Note'', Ross Anderson, Markus Kuhn, to appear at Usenix Electronic Commerce 96 (19th November) [3] ``Hardwaresicherheit von Mikrochips in Chipkarten'', Osman Kocar, Datenschutz und Datensicherheit v 20 no 7 (July 96) pp 421--424 [4] ``Secure Deletion of Data from Magnetic and Solid-State Memory'', Peter Gutmann, Usenix Security 96 pp 77--89 [5] ``Why Cryptosystems Fail'', Ross Anderson, in Communications of the ACM v 7 no 11 (Nov 94) pp 32--40 [6] ``Protocol Failure in the Escrowed Encryption Standard'', Matt Blaze, in Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (2-4 November 1994), ACM Press, pp 59--67 ------------------------------ From: Ed Hogan Subject: Worldwide Interconnects/Installers Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 17:18:49 -0500 Patrick, I hope that this email is not to much of an bother as I am sure that your get all sorts of requests all day long. We manufacture autodialers, X.25 access components, and call bridging equipment. Primarily used in seamless international callback applications for hotel and corporate end-users. We are looking for a list or access to some sort of database that would include PBX dealers/installers/interconnects worldwide. We are in the process of setting up an international dealer network for the installation and maintenance of our equipment. Our customers include AT&T, GlobalOne, Sprint, Kallback, Justice, MTC, Telegroup, and all the major callback providers. The problem is that these are basically marketing companies trying to install technical equipment overseas, we are trying to help them with this network of dealers. We would appreciate hearing from interested parties who wish to be part of our database. Thanks for your help. Best Regards, Ed Hogan, International Sales Manager Immix Telecom phone: 1 954 968 5725 fax: 1 954 968 6527 email: ehogan@immixtel.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps readers interested in being part of your dealer network will write to you for more information. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bradley Ward Allen Subject: Re: Typos in Lucent Television Commercials Date: 31 Oct 1996 12:57:43 -0500 [Different meanings of spelling and punctuation of (similar-sounding) words, and their misuse] > It's true that you can decode it, but in the meantime your > thought process has come to a screeching halt and the flow of information > is broken. Thank you. I always *knew* there was a reason behind my absolute abhorrence of the misapostrophication of "it is" and "its". Add to this the fact that I myself am rather horrible at grammar and spelling and have a penchant for making lots of new words without a thought, and one can easily understand why I was always confused as to why I got so annoyed by this apostrophe transgression when I myself wasn't so perfect. You finally pinpointed it for me: my thought process has come to a screeching halt and the flow of information is broken. Now I can rest in peace knowing that I'm not being hypocritical when I insult misused "'"s. I think the one thing that allows all the illiterates to misuse apostrophes so much and get away with it from *their* point of view is that they do everything phonetically and don't know of a separate meaning for the various spellings; they must already employ the same facilities parsing same-sounding words in context with reading as in speech, and pay little if any attention to the spelling. Unfortunately, knowledge is a handicap here since the different spellings have distinct meanings which do not cross, and when we see their use we parse according to the distinct meaning automatically since that is what that word is supposed to mean. Someone who interprets it phonetically before parsing may never encounter this; someone who interprets by reading will be predisposed to be hurt by this error. (I always worry this can be used as a tactic against literate people being as proficient at things.) As an aside but related, and oddly related to comp.dcom.telecom (showing how any conversation, let free, will eventually circle to the point where it's once again very relevent to the designated speaking location), I don't talk voice with people often enough to have that voice part of my brain streamlined, and probably send voice correspondence via more of a process of converting between voice and those processes in the brain that convert written word than most high-volume voice corresponders; in any case my voice parsing abilities are generally slower than normal and often make me fumble (however that may be as much due to my odd hearing abilities which make me hear high pitched sounds better and speech worse, causing me ever so many life problems). I'm not sure if that (reading easier than voice) is a handicap that is so particular to me that it can be considered more just my problem or everybody's. This aside may bring up important issues for sociologists to consider if they're ever consulted in providing direction for society's main forms of social contacts in the future, if the Internet somehow takes too much place in a person's life and makes it difficult to speak person to person. (Notice that television is the phonetic version of same wrt this topic). However, people may naturally organize their lives in such a way that this doesn't become a problem. Who knows. E.g., cars more easily damage me than most other people, albeit their horrible unnaturalness, so maybe this is just me complaining about my own general problems of coping; that's what I'm constantly attempting to deduce and get so afraid of. Another thing that might happen is that if many people's voice abilities debilitate, then their person to person interactions will be roughly similar enough that they won't notice any disabilities. Just imagine, all of today's illiterates in the future complaining "God, all these kids, they don't know how to talk! Wy can't they keep up with everything I say?? And why they talk so slowly and convoluted-like?" and the younger generations paying them no mind as usual. BTW, I too saw the errors in the Lucent commercial (I believe a full page ad in the New York Times back cover; since I'm a frequent NYT reader it would be hard for me to miss it (yes, I do hereby attest that I am now full of misinformation (my knowledge of the truth may well have been higher when I read the Santa Cruz Comic News instead))). ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 23:07:54 -0400 From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: cats8@erols.com Organization: Evergreen Software Subject: Re: Tennessee Split Tad Cook wrote: > More Area-Code Splitting Likely in Tennessee, Analysts Say > By Cree Lawson, Nashville Banner, Tenn. > Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News > Industry insiders say that exploding growth in phone numbers will > result in still more new area codes for Tennessee in the next > decade. They predict that the 423 area code in East Tennessee and the > 901 prefix in West Tennessee will reach their usage limits in the next > few years. > New area codes such as 423 are being gobbled up almost as quickly as > they're created. California has nearly exhausted its 501 and 301 > exchanges, both of which were introduced only a few years ago. This should read "510" and "310". I have 301 here in Silver Spring, MD; I think 501 is Arkansas. Paul Robinson (Formerly PAUL@TDR.COM) Evergreen Software Corp [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are correct; it was a stupid typo- graphical error which got past the editor. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Tennessee Split Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 22:13:13 -0800 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) wrote: > More Area-Code Splitting Likely in Tennessee, Analysts Say > By Cree Lawson, Nashville Banner; Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News > The group selected the 615 zone by taking the counties in the current > Metro Area Calling sector (all those that border Davidson County) and > adding Dickson, DeKalb and Cannon counties because they have telephone > cooperatives, says Lynn Greer, chairman of the Tennessee Regulatory > Authority. What on EARTH does the fact that they have telephone cooperatives have to do with drawing the line for an area code split? The geographic boundaries are much more sensible WITHOUT Dickson, DeKalb, and Cannon Counties. The split would also be much less confusing, because you could tell people simply, "Local to Nashville = 615, not local to Nashville = 931." Much easier than having to add the caveat about these two extra areas (Dickson and DeKalb/Cannon). > New area codes such as 423 are being gobbled up almost as quickly as > they're created. California has nearly exhausted its 501 and 301 > exchanges, both of which were introduced only a few years ago. Yipes! That should be 510 and 310, not 501 (Arkansas) and 301 (part of Maryland). Linc Madison * San Francisco, CA * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 22:18:41 -0800 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) wrote: > Area-Code Plan Would Divide Tennessee Town > By Cree Lawson, Nashville Banner; Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News > Nov. 5--Life in Spring Hill -- already complicated because the town > straddles Williamson and Maury counties -- will get even more complex > if a new area code splits the community. > That means that by 1999, Spring Hill residents would have to dial 10 > digits and pay long-distance charges just to call across town. > "Hopefully, they can work something out because that would just be > ridiculous," says Spring Hill Mayor Ron Hankins. > Hankins says he already pays long distance to call his Williamson > County home from his office just a few miles away. The issue of the area code split is IRRELEVANT to the issue of toll calling areas. There has never been a single instance in which a local call before an area code split became a toll call due to the split. Not one. If it is already a toll call from one part of Spring Hill to another, it will still be a toll call, and the only difference will be that in one direction you will dial 1-931-NXX-XXXX, instead of both directions dialing 1-615-NXX-XXXX as now. This is a dangerously ignorant piece of reportage. Linc Madison * San Francisco, CA * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In other words, it was a pretty routine day at the newspaper office. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: catfood@apk.net (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN Date: 8 Nov 1996 00:15:02 -0500 Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access Uni* Site In article , Tad Cook wrote: > That means that by 1999, Spring Hill residents would have to dial 10 > digits and pay long-distance charges just to call across town. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Every "split" story I have read in the past indicated that the split in question would not create any new toll charges. Is this new in Spring Hill or did the reporter just assume something? Mark W. Schumann | catfood@apk.net | http://junior.apk.net/~catfood | Mike White: the Ralph Perk of the 90s! Draft | Pat O'Malley in '97! ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: Re: Pacific Bell/PCS/San Diego Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 21:47:58 PST In TELECOM Digest V16 #594, nilsphone@aol.com (Nilsphone) wrote: >> Ericsson "Flip" Phone to Sell for $149 > Can we get it with the Nokia you showed in San Diego at the RNC? They > have a four-line display, I believe Ericsson only has a two-line > display? [and other questions] I'm afraid I can't answer those questions. You'll want to contact PacBell on those issues, since they wrote the press release. I forwarded it to the Digest for everyone's benefit. --------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Jim St. John Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 23:05:02 -0500 Organization: Internet Indiana Reply-To: jim@su1.in.net > Our home line was originally on 10c per call (you get 65 calls free) > but, because I am sending a lot of faxes while looking for work (I'm > currently unemployed), I had to switch to unlimited calling after > running up $85.00 in toll charges one month (more than 900 faxes). I had a nasty surprise with measuered service. I was operating a BBS and moved to a nearby Northern suburb that didn't have as wide of a local calling area. Since I still owned the old house I left one of the old BBS lines in place and set it up to call-forward to the new BBS number so that folks in the Southern suburbs could still call the BBS toll-free. In fact I kept the line in place even after I sold the house since there was no need to even have a phone on it. This was a flat-rate line and I finally decided that since there were no outgoing calls on that line I might as well switch it over to the cheaper measured rate. Well, you guessed it, every call that was forwarded was billed by Ameritech as if it were an outgoing call on that line. Something like $250 worth of measured service in a single month. A call to Ameritech didn't get me anywhere. My argument was that they never mentioned that forwarded calls were billed, even though they knew I had call forwarding on that line, their argument was that I should have asked. A call to the local PUC did get some results though. Eventually they did credit my account and switch it back to flat-rate. jim ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 01:07:56 -0500 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? So the RBOCs are on a bender again. This time, it's PacBell spending a rumored $7 million on a publicity campaign to attack the Internet. (You think the press runs those articles because they suddenly discover "news"?) And Bell Atlantic has also submitted a fairly detailed paper to the FCC to try to justify reclassifying Internet Service Providers (end users of the network) as Interexchange Carriers (contributors of huge subsidies to the local network). They throw partial numbers around like candy; when you get all the numbers together, the story melts away like cotton candy in the rain. To wit: PacBell talks about "$14-15 million" to upgrade the network this year to handle Internet-bound traffic. Lessee, that's about a dollar a phone, in capital improvements. Bell Atlantic suggests that the FCC translate capital to expense by taking 37% per year. Divide by twelve months, and the Internet is costing PacBell a whopping three cents a month per phone! Gee, that'll put 'em out of business soon, no? Perhaps that's why they are doing a direct mail campaign to sell second lines, *with* a free gift of five months of unlimited Internet access on PacBell's ISP subsidiary! (Can you spell "tie-in"?) Bellcore talks about "a billion dollars" over several years, nationally. That's under ten bucks a phone over some years. A quarter a month? I doubt it comes to that. And why is Internet usage different from all other usage? If all blue-eyed people, Spanish-speaking people, short people, or left-handed people were singled out, they'd see the same thing. Internet users who dial up are just users of the phone network. Disregarding the few who nail lines, of course. Telcos are of course always interested in moving towards fully-measured service, German style. Subscribers just don't want it. Now that local telco competition is on the horizon, you'd think that the RBOCs would stop thinking about "fleecing the Ratepayer" and start learning about foreign concepts like "delighting the customer". But that would be too much. A leopard doesn't change its spots just because it goes from the jungle to the desert. But how much does usage really cost, in other terms? Bell Atlantic's FCC filing has partial numbers. They do get around to saying that an ISP's dial-in line, if ANALOG, costs them $75 per month, versus the typical $17/month measured business line rate. And they say that an ISP using ISDN PRI costs them $50/month per channel. Those are based on a stated usage of 608 minutes per day. Now if we generously interpret the $75 as being the cost above the $17, which is doubtful, then $75.00/18000 is still under half a penny per minute. If we take the more typical case, where PRI is $50/channel and they charge $17 (which is a bit low, but BA's PRI rates are among the lowest, at present), then the usage is $33/month, which is under two-tenths of a cent per minute. That's what all of this Internet traffic is costing them, by their OWN numbers! But of course they WANT the FCC to allow them to charge two cents per minute to the ISP. But are they losing money with the current rates? Hell no. After all, in their territories, ratemaking policy always counts the full cost of the call to the caller, not the called party. So the ISP, who makes no calls, is not responsible for the cost of the calls. Thousands of the ISP's subscribers are. And they're paying for thousands of lines. Residence lines are usually flat rate. Almost no place in the US has mandatory timed local calling for residence. But flat rate isn't "free" calling. It simply averages the cost of calls amongst all of the flat rate subscribers. In my case, I pay NYNEX around $20/month for a flat rate calling plan. PacBell is selling lots of second lines to Internet users. That revenue should average up to cover the two-tenths of a cent cost of local calls to ISPs. If it isn't enough, then they should raise the rates. As Ian Angus pointed out, non-blocking switching isn't free. All usage contributes towards certain traffic-sensitive costs, in the switches, and in the inter-switch trunks. That's where the $50-$75/channel comes from, by adding all of those costs together. Telcos aren't charities, and they need to recover their costs, with reasonable markup. But with most Internet users making fewer than 40 hours per month of calls, at .2 cent/minute (18 cents/hour), the cost of building up the phone network to carry Internet access is a whole heck of a lot cheaper than some of the alternatives that people keep proposing. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein@bbn.com +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone. Sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: Mike Fox Date: 7 Nov 96 11:27:39 Subject: Re: Last Laugh! 666 Exchange and Disgruntled Subcribers > PONTIAC, Mich. (AP) -- The number of the beast proved unbearable for a > for some people. > So when Oakland County's new 248 area code takes effect in September, > Ameritech Corp. will offer customers with the 666 exchange the option > of a new number. > The option comes after the pastor at the Shepherd Fellowship Church asked > Ameritech for the switch. > For fundamentalist Christians, "666" is the number that designates the > beast. Walker said the church has put up with the exchange since > 1990. When I was travelling in San Francisco this spring, I was flipping through the phone book in the hotel room and saw that every telephone number for a Jesuit college in SF (I don't remember its exact name) is in exchange 666! That exchange probably belongs to their PBX, because I didn't see any other 666 numbers in a quick scan. I guess if they can put up with it, others can too :) Mike ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #605 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 8 11:48:27 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA03402; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 11:48:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 11:48:27 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611081648.LAA03402@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #606 TELECOM Digest Fri, 8 Nov 96 11:48:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 606 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI One Breaks its 800 Number service (Mike Borsetti) Re: BellCore Updates Web Page ... Sorta (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Scott Miller) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (David Clayton) Re: Tele-Go, How Does it Work? (mreiney@hevanet.com) Re: AT&T Digital Receives no Calls in Orlando; Can Call Out! (P. Streicher) Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits (Eric Elder) Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers (Jeff Colbert) Re: Banks Bullying Credit Unions (John R. Grout) Re: More Good News About Spamming (Dave J. Stott) News Briefs: Ericsson; AT&T; Bell Atlantic (Monty Solomon) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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 Borsetti Subject: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 06:03:01 -0800 Organization: A customer of Pacific Bell Internet Services Reply-To: mike.borsetti@pobox.com I ordered MCI One, and gave out the "personal 800 number" to selected "VIP" associates. I programmed only one number (my cellular phone, which has voicemail), and the service worked great. If I wasn't in a position to answer my cellular phone, voicemail would pick up and callers could leave a message in the same system where I get all my other messages. A while back I started getting complaints from these people that at times when they called the 800 number they couldn't reach me or my voicemail. A little bit of investigative work determined that MCI -- without telling me -- changed the service so that after about 25 seconds of ringing it would interrupt the call and tell the caller "We're sorry, the party cannot be reached at this time, please try your call later". This happens just a split second before the voicemail has a chance to pick up. Calling MCI customer care was enlightening: the lady interrupted me several times to condescendingly tell me how MCI never designed the service to do what I was using it for, so the fact that now my callers couldn't leave me messages is -- from MCI's standpoint -- just fine. I threatened to cancel service, and she obliged!! A second person was a lot more understanding and told me that he could set the delay to a longer period of 40 seconds, so that my cellular voicemail could have the chance to pick up. The catch: according to him, all lines' delays are overwritten to 25 seconds on a weekly basis! Given the situation, I can see a few options: (1) try to write/call somebody in MCI who knows what's going on (e.g. product manager, director of product management, etc.) and get them to reverse the changes they made to the service. Problem: don't know who that person is or how to reach them. (2) sue MCI for not appropriately warning me of system changes that materially impacted the nature of their service to me. Problem: paperwork associated with this. (3) cancel MCI One and get a 'real' 800 number from another vendor. Problem: look stupid in front of my associates and have them memorize a different number [BTW, any ideas as to the best provider?] Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Mike Borsetti [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, here is a chance to mention my friends at Call Home America once again! :) Not only will they give you an 800 number for $3.95 per month with rates of 24 cents peak and 19 cents off-peak per minute in the continental USA and rates of 45/34 cents per minute for Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (40 cents per minute all times from Canada) they will give you a ten dollar credit to be used on your service as a special promotion now through December 15. They will program it to ring at whatever number you request, although to change where it rings you need to call them. Best of all -- and why else do you think I would run this message? -- they will give *me* a ten dollar credit on my account for each of you who sign up for an 800 number. I get my cellular service from them in addition to having a couple of lines defaulted to them for long distance, so I sure can use the credit. Their service is very good and reliable however. Phone 800-594-3000 to ask for an 800 number. Mention special offer code 'ZREF-9'. Request that the ten dollar referral credit be given to Patrick Townson, Account # 0201355818. They will bill you direct if you provide them with a social security number or they will bill you automatically on one of various credit cards otherwise. I've had service with them for about three years including my cell phone service and find they are very reliable and responsive. Call Home America is part of Frontier Communications. If you otherwise feel like an 800 number for $3.95 per month I will certainly appreciate the credits I get on my bill as a result. Thanks! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: BellCore Updates Web Page ... Sorta Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 09:09:41 -0800 Organization: Tulane University As John Cropper originally titles this, 'Sorta' is right. > BellCore's monthly update took place on the afternoon of the seventh, > with a few surprises, but lacking in other areas ... > 313 Michigan: 734 announced as split code for areas outside of Detroit (permissive/mandatory dates and test numbers still to be announced) > 908 New Jersey: 732 added, but with no info > (we already know 5/1/97 and 11/1/97) > 201 New Jersey: 973 added, but with no info > (we already know 5/1/97 and 11/1/97) (test numbers not yet indicated on Bellcore's webpage) > 425 Washington: Test number of 425-452-0009 added > 253 Washington: Test number of 253-627-0062 added > No mention of the test number for 440, the new 615 split (931), nor the > 415 (650), 916 (530), or 818 (626). There is no further info on Bellcore NANPA's pages regarding the Caribbean areas splitting from 809. Grenada (including Carricou)'s new NPA 473 as well as St.Vincent and the Grenadines' new NPA 784, while mentioned on the webpages, *still* have no permissive/mandatory dates, nor any test numbers. And the 'not yet officially announced' splitting off from NPA 809 of the U.S. Virgin Islands (expected to be NPA 340) and the Turks & Caicos Islands (expected to be NPA 649) aren't yet on Bellcore's New Area Codes webpage. Maybe the individual islands' national/local governments haven't yet officially finalized/approved the plans. Also still *not* yet on Bellcore's pages are the new area codes previously mentioned in the Digest for: Massachusetts - 781 splits from (or overlays on?) 617 Massachusetts - 978 splits from (or overlays on?) 508 South Carolina's second split (along the coastal area?) of 843 from 803. However, the new 724 for southwest Pennsylvania (including Pittsburgh) now has dates and test numbers according to Bellcore's webpages. It *will* be an overlay, effective 1 May 1997, but I think that Bell Atlantic had already announced that, including the date. As an *overlay*, its effective date is not a 'permissive' date, but the *mandatory* date. Assignments from this new 724 area code will be *new central office codes and line numbers* which, other than co-existing in the same geographic territory, will have *nothing* to do with existing 412-NXX codes. The test numbers for the 724 overlay to 412 are also indicated on the NANPA webpage: 724-999-1111 724-991-2222 I wonder if both indicated test numbers are correct. You would think that *both* would begin as 724-999 *or* 724-991, but *not* one number with one NXX and the other number with a different NXX; the last four digits of both test numbers are using a 'similar pattern' which would make you think that they would rather both be from the same NXX central office code. Bellcore NANPA has also updated their webpage showing the list of Planning Letters (available at US$ 10.00). The most recently announced ones are: PL-NANP-016 (714 in CA is in 'jeopardy'; so what else is new) PL-NANP-017 (212 in NY - Manhattan - is in 'jeopardy') [I've been told by a NYNEX contact that they are studying whether to make ten-digit local dialing *mandatory* within the NYCity metro area, (without 'requiring' a 1+ on local billed/rate calls) so that they can use the 'wireless overlay' 917 area code for *general use* central office code assignments. Presently, local 'home' NPA calls *might* presently be permissively dialable as ten-digits, but *only with a '1+'*, just like dialing local 'adjacent' NPA calls presently is, as there are some code numbering conflicts. Standard 'home' NPA local dialing in New York City is presently 'straight seven digits'.] PL-NANP-018 Overlay of 412 (PA) PL-NANP-019 Split of 206 (WA) I wonder if the PL regarding Washington State includes the info for *both* new area codes splitting, or if this PL regards only on of the new NPA codes such that a *second* PL (at *another* ten dollars) will indicate the info on the other new NPA code. The two most recently made available PL's regarding a 'jeopardy' situation are only two pages each, and each costs ten-dollars! Also, there is no mention of a PL for 284's split from 809 in the British Virgin Islands. Last month, Bellcore's webpages finally made mention of the effective permissive/mandatory dates for this new NPA code, as well as indicating the test number. The main URL for Bellcore NANPA and Bellcore TRA is: http://www.bellcore.com/NANP, and click away) Maybe next month or in about two weeks, Bellcore NANPA will 'sort-of' update (and correct) their webpages again. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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, 7 Nov 1996 16:39:02 +0000 From: scott miller Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Reply-To: smiller@bnr.ca Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd. In article , Bill Newkirk writes: > But then I get hit with at least five ads from Bellsouth in the last > month for me to sign up for bellsouthnet and to get additional > phone lines installed at a discount over "normal" so I can dial up the > ISP and leave the line nailed up as much as possible .. and there's > been heavy tv, radio, and print advertising for such services. > It can't be both ways. Sure it can. The Bellsouth people that are flogging their ISP service aren't the same ones running the voice network. They're just trying to run a cost-effective ISP just like all the other ISPs out there, and make a few (unregulated) bucks under the same rules as all the other ISPs. If the phone-guys succeed in changing the access charges, it will affect all ISPs equally, so they don't have to worry about it. > If the cable tv folks were to offer a box with a 10-base-T connector > on it and give me a stable e-mail address, news, etc. for a price, I > would have to consider moving to it. They already know how to get a > lot of data to me, just that the z-tac box we have doesn't have a > network connector on the back ... They're working on it, we're working on it, everybody is working on it. There looks to be a lot of money on the table. My point in previous posts is that if Telcos stay true to tradition, they cannot and will not let anything compromise the stability of basic phone service for the general populace. Maybe they don't care anymore, but I'd bet most Telcos would rather concede some revenue to alternate providers than allow basic service to be affected. ADSL and other new technologies are ways for them to play on both sides of the fence, but I don't think they're about to sacrifice POTS on the Altar of the Internet. Oh, and for you guys who want to set up your ADSL ISP inside the CO, check out http://infoweb.interaccess.com/, and call your local RBOC to lease a couple of Megahertz of bandwidth on some POTS copper. Who knows? They might like to rent out their lines for a few bucks a month, and leave the details (like capital investment) to you ... Scott Miller, in the bowels of Bell-Northern Research (or Nortel or something) smiller@nortel.ca aa438@freenet.carleton.ca ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 10:21:48 GMT Organization: Customer of Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia Ian Angus contributed the following: > "Gridlock" can occur when there are unusually long holding time in > locations where lines have bneen installed (and priced) on a 4:1 or > even 6:1 concentration ratio. Arrrrrrggggghhhh!, can we please stop using this misleading term? The problem is nothing like gridlock, there is no gridlock if the traffic on a road is travelling at full legal speed bumper to bumper and there are no gaps for you to get in from your side street, that is called CONGESTION -- something not unknown to telephony networks I believe. Pat, can you please change the subject of this thread so that this misleading term dies a quicker death? Surely the basic issue is that the nature of use of the *voice* network is changing due to increased Internet use, and the network either has to evolve to accomodate that use, or the use has to change. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well the thread has just about gone as far as it can anyway, so this would probably be a good time to just close it off. A lot has been said about it in the past several days. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mreiney@hevanet.com Subject: Re: Tele-Go, How Does it Work? Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 02:46:30 -0800 Organization: Hevanet Communications Reply-To: mreiney@hevanet.com Thanks for the input. When I called GTE, they told me that they had discontinued the service in this area and told people to keep the phones. But then they traded service areas. Airtouch continues to service existing accounts, but will not help me at all. Sure would be nice to hear from someone who knows how to program the local base feature. ------------------------------ From: PStreicher@aol.com Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 08:22:02 -0500 Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Receives no Calls in Orlando But Can Call Out! Jeffrey, I don't think my calls were 'cloned' as I have since received a detailed billing statement and there were no calls showing thosed days except the outgoing calls that I made. Would that be a good indication that I was not 'cloned'? Or, while being cloned does it inhibit your receiving calls and then the cloner can make calls at any time later with your nam data? Also, can a digital phone be used for PCS? Or, does one have to purchase a new 'PCS' type phone? You say the same thing happened to you, did you get billed for calls you did not make? Paul Streicher Tampa, Florida ------------------------------ From: Eric Elder Subject: Re: Clocking For T1 Circuits Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 08:45:25 -0800 Organization: Lucent Technologies Reply-To: eelder@mailhost.paradyne.com Bob Izenberg wrote: > Our regional telco isn't providing clocking on local area T1s. > The Ascend Pipeline 130s that we use on some of our circuits need a > stable clocking source and can't provide it themselves. Some long line providers are very careful to asssure that Class 2 clocking is consistent through their networks. Other companies will grab a clock signal from whereever it can get it. Switch providers if you are having clock problems. Also, some digital devices such as the Paradyne DSU's can compensate for an erratic clock. ------------------------------ From: Jeff Colbert Subject: Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers Date: Wed, 06 Nov 1996 16:26:19 -0600 Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc. Reply-To: jcolbert@earthlink.net I could not get AOL to set up an account using the VISA Debit card. It would only work using a real VISA. The tech support people said name and address had to match exactly what was on statement. Also if you strike out three times, you have to re-install the software, according to tech support. Jeff [TELECOM Digest Editor's note: I've never had any trouble getting anyone who otherwise accepted VISA to also accept the VISA Debit card. Actually, from the number on th efront I do not think you can tell the difference, and the logo/design on the front of the card is the same as of of First Chicago's credit card offerings. Plus, since you can have the debit card tied in not only to your checking account but into your line of credit (i.e. credit card) as well, I do not know how AOL would know for sure where the money was coming from; just that they were getting paid each month. PAT] ------------------------------ From: grout@sp55.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: Banks Bullying Credit Unions Date: 06 Nov 1996 21:35:58 -0600 Organization: Center for Supercomputing R and D, UIUC In article jbutz@attmail.com (John J Butz) writes: > The United Teletech Federal Credit Union can no longer accept new > members who are not employed by AT&T, Lucent or Bellcore. This due to > an injunction the banks got against all federally chartered credit > unions. Actually, it was the federally-chartered credit union's NCUA (their equivalent of the FDIC) which imposed that requirement itself in _response_ to a very complicated, and not yet finished, Federal legal decision about the power of Federal regulators to permit federally chartered credit unions (like United Teletech FCU) to admit members who worked at companies unrelated to the original one to which the credit union was tied (since Bellcore and Lucent were spun off by AT&T, they are related and so unaffected by the ruling). In fact, things could even get worse ... the judge is now considering whether or not to force credit unions like United Teletech FCU to eliminate all their _existing_ members whose membership derived from employment by unrelated companies (e.g., for United Teletech FCU, those who weren't employed by AT&T, Lucent or Bellcore when they joined ... of course, if they work for them now, they could rejoin)... here's hoping an appeals court, or Congress, acts to prevent _that_. John R. Grout Center for Supercomputing R & D j-grout@uiuc.edu Coordinated Science Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well there always was supposed to be some sort of 'affinity group' involvement in membership in credit unions. The way these things evolve over the years is interesting. I remember well the old 'Telephone and Telegraph Employees Credit Union' here in Chicago. Only employees of WUTCO and AT&T/Bell were allowed to be members. Then one day many years ago they dropped their credit union status and became 'Bell Federal Savings and Loan Association'; still located in the Board of Trade Building; still with the big grandfather clock in the lobby with the Western Union works in the clock. 99 percent of their customers were still employees of IBT or WUTCO locally, but gradually a few 'outsiders' became customers. After many years, in the S&L scandals of a few years ago, they were on the verge of bankruptcy like most S&L's and they were merged into Talman Federal Savings and Loan which then in turn got merged with a bunch of others in the same predicament. The few remaining customers left over from the telephone and telegraph credit union days have a certain category of account number which identifies them as such. I was a customer of Continental Bank in Chicago when Continental went belly-up (the second time!) and the government made First National Bank take over all the individual depositors but not the corporate accounts. My First National account number still reflects after ten years the fact that I am a 'conversion account' brought over from Continental Bank in the middle 1980's. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: More Good News About Spamming From: dstott@juno.com (Dave J Stott) Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 16:35:15 EST Here's more good news about the fight against cyber junk. CUPERTINO, Calif., Nov. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- Concentric Network Corporation, a leading provider of tailored network solutions for the rapidly growing electronic commerce and Internet/intra net markets, today announced another major victory in its continuing efforts to eliminate spamming. On Tuesday November 5, 1996, Concentric became the first on-line service provider to obtain a permanent injunction prohibiting Cyber Promotions, Inc. and its president Sanford Wallace from sending any unsolicited commercial advertisements via e-mail to its subscribers. .stott ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 07:33:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: News Briefs: Ericsson; AT&T; Bell Atlantic Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Excerpts from Full Closing Bell @ 11/07/96 * ERICSSON LM TELE said it had won an order worth two billion crowns ($303.4 million) for mobile telephony from the U.S.'s AT&T CORP Wireless Services. Ericsson said this was the biggest order that Ericsson has signed with a U.S. buyer for mobile telephony. (Reuters 09:14 AM ET 11/07/96) * After market close, BELL ATLANTIC CORP said it expected to have local interconnection deals with AT&T CORP , MCI COMM Corp and SPRINT CORP before it applies to enter long distance service. Bell Atlantic is planning to apply for long distance in its own region within 90 days of meeting the checklist requirements, and expects long distance approvals by the middle of 1997. In each of Bell Atlantic's six states and the District of Columbia, talks with each of the big three are in arbitration. (Reuters 06:06 PM ET 11/07/96) For the full text story, see http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=469815-7c0 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #606 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 12 11:14:37 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA15799; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 11:14:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 11:14:37 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611121614.LAA15799@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #607 TELECOM Digest Tue, 12 Nov 96 11:14:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 607 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Down For Four Days: No Idea Why (TELECOM Digest Editor) Fred Goldstein Critique of Bell Atlantic ISDN Cost Studies (Monty Solomon) Pay Phone Rates Likely to Rise (spinal@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu) Book Review: "Telecommunications Technology Handbook" by Minoli (Rob Slade) Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Tad Cook) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 12 Nov 1996 10:13:17 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Down For Four Days: No Idea Why This is just a short note to let everyone know this site was disconnected for almost four days and so far I have no explanation why. All I know is at MIT someone pulled the plug on Friday in the late afternoon and there was no response from anyone there until Tuesday morning about 9:00 am at which point I got ahold of someone who agreed to fix the problem. At first I had thought the system was down since it would not respond to my attempts to telnet in. I found out this morning it must have been operational all weekend because certain cron jobs ran right on schedule, etc. However there was no access in or out to the rest of the world. The mailqueue is extremely overloaded with thousands of pieces of mail waiting to be delivered out of here to subscribers. This would be issues of the Digest mostly from last Friday. Likewise, the incoming mail is piling in at the rate of a letter every two or three seconds as I write this. Quite of bit of incoming mail was apparently turned away by lcs.mit.edu and returned to the sender when it sat at the gateway here for three days and could not reach this machine. I had no way to reach any of my files or scripts; if I had been able to I would have worked from some other location over the past several days. As of yet, as I said above, there has been no explanation of any sort. As a result, the mail and the Digests will run behind schedule for a few days. Most of the mail received over the weekend will simply not be used at all in an effort to catch up. If you consider it that important, you can resend it I guess, adding to the congestion and backlog even more. :( Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 01:29:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Fred Goldstein Critique of Bell Atlantic ISDN Cost Studies Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 14:18:06 -0500 (EST) From: James Love Subject: Fred Goldstein critique of Bell Atlantic ISDN Cost Studies ----------------------------------------------------------------- Info-Policy-Notes - A newsletter available from listproc@tap.org ----------------------------------------------------------------- INFORMATION POLICY NOTES November 11, 1996 This is Fred Goldstein's testimony to the Maryland Public Services Commission on the ISDN tariff. It contains a devastating critique of the Bell Atlantic cost study for ISDN pricing. It is rather technical, but I am posting it because of the importance of the critique of the Bell Atlantic's statements regarding the Interent and network congestion. BEFORE THE MARYLAND PUBLIC SERVICES COMMISSION In the Matter of the Residential ) Intellilinq BRI Service Offering ) Case 8730 of Bell Atlantic, Maryland, Inc. ) REBUTTAL TESTIMONY OF FRED GOLDSTEIN ON BEHALF OF CONSUMER PROJECT ON TECHNOLOGY November 5, 1996 PREPARED REBUTTAL TESTIMONY OF FRED GOLDSTEIN Q1. Please state your name and business address, and summarize your professional qualifications. A1. My name is Fred Goldstein. I am a Senior Consultant at BBN Corporation. This testimony does not represent an official position of BBN Corporation. It is prepared on behalf of the Center for the Study of Responsive Law's Consumer Project on Technology. My business address is at BBN Corp., 50 Moulton St., Cambridge MA 02138. I have worked in the telecommunications and data network field since 1977. My experience with ISDN dates back to 1985 when I became Digital Equipment Corporation's voting member of ANSI-accredited Technical Subcommittee T1D1 (later T1S1), which was responsible for producing North American ISDN standards. I am the author of the book "ISDN In Perspective" (Reading MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992) and have taught courses on ISDN for Northeastern University and National Technological University. I have also been a technical leader in BBN's ISDN acitivities as an Internet Service Provider. I hold three patents in the area of Broadband ISDN and Asynchronous Transfer Mode congestion management and switching. Q2. What is your opinion of the Bell Atlantic analysis used to support its residential tariff? A2. The first testimony is that of Stephen A Reisinger [REIS]. The gist of this testimony seems to be that Internet Service Providers place a high load on the network, particularly when they use analog ports. This is not even on point to Case 8730 concerning Residential ISDN rates, except by inference. Reisinger begins [REIS at p. 2/ line 21] by stating that "far fewer R-ISDN lines can be accommodated on equivalent pieces of equipment." This would imply that higher monthly recurring charges (MRCs) should be applied to ISDN. That ISDN MRCs are higher than analog MRCs are not in dispute; the application of measured-service charges to R-ISDN is in dispute. Reisinger then analyzes the incoming traffic to Internet Service Providers, none of whom are eligible for R-ISDN tariffs. He points out congestion that occurs at Central Offices that receive calls. These lines generate essentially zero calls. In his attached Report to the FCC calling for higher charges to be placed on ISPs, he requests that ISPs bear a large multiple of the cost of the additional traffic generated by users calling them. Yet the conclusion he is attempting to draw in Case 8730 is that R-ISDN rates should be metered at a contributory level in order to pay for the same thing. His examples are particularly off point. They mostly concern analog Myersville, had 127 analog lines. The second, Herndon, had 1131 analog lines. Residential ISDN subscribers can not generally call analog lines! They generally call ISPs who use ISDN PRI, which does not use any line unit, or sometimes BRI, which does not use the analog line unit. In fact, his arguments are for increased migration to ISDN. An analog line unit on a 5ESS has a maximum capacity of 512 lines and 64 time slots, or about 3.8 CCS/line if filled [REIS at 11/16]. But ISDN Line Units on a 5ESS have up to 256 time slots [REIS at 13/footnote 8] to serve up to 512 Basic Rate lines, which can have up to 1024 B channels. He states that a load of 8.6 CCS/line will limit an ISLU to 448 lines. This would not be serious even if it were true, but it does not add up. A full ISLU with 512 lines at 8.6 CCS/line generates 4403 CCS. From the Poisson table, this can be served by 149 time slots at P.01 blocking. This is well below the 256 time slot limit. Also, the 8.6 CCS/line number is derived from ISDN experience which is primarily Centrex. Bell Atlantic actively markets ISDN Centrex as a service that provides unlimited calling within the Centrex group. This invites users to "nail" channels. Any tariff that does not provide totally unlimited usage will discourage nailed usage. Since Centrex costs substantially less than Bell Atlantic's proposed rate for ISDN BRI with unlimited use ($249/month), users who plan to "nail" ISDN lines are likely to use their ISP's Centrex service, not R-ISDN. Indeed the testimony of Curt Koeppen [KOEP] seems to contradict Reisinger, where it says, "The typical customer spends an average of 10-40 hours per month on-line."[KOEP at 5/13] While this cannot be directly translated to CCS, it is in line with typical voice usage patterns, not ISDN Centrex. Given that the ISDN line unit has such greater capacity than the analog line unit, it becomes clear that high-traffic data users should be encouraged to migrate to ISDN. Further, since analog dial-in traffic costs far more than PRI dial-in traffic (estimated by Reisinger at $50/month/channel vs. $75/month/channel), ISDN potentially reduces costs at both ends of the connection! Reisinger also argues that ISDN incurs costs by requiring the installation of 64 kbit/sec clear-channel trunks, compared to "56 kb/s trunk" facilities used for voice. While much of the embedded base of trunk facilities is not 64 kbit/sec "clear", most new facilities are. Also, Bell Atlantic proposes charging the same usage rates for calls placed on older facilities, which can use either the speech/audio bearer capability or the 56 kbps data bearer capability. A particularly bad scare tactic occurs in Reisinger's testimony about 911 service [REIS at 16/23]. He supposes that 911 calls would be blocked if 64 analog users simultaneously nailed up calls on the same line unit. Given a small percentage of "nailed" users, this is, of course, extremely improbable! But it would be even more vanishingly improbable on an ISDN line unit, with its larger number of time slots. It should be pointed out that the DMS-100 switch has even more favorable ISDN traffic characteristics. An older-style analog-only Line Concentration Module (LCM) has 640 one-line card slots sharing a maximum of 180 time slots, assigned 30 at a time. An ISDN-capable LCME has 480 card slots sharing a maximum of 480 time slots. This allows non-blocking use of one B channel at a time, or approximately 34 CCS/line total. Robert Terry's testimony is not quantitative; it simply asserts that ISDN should be regulated as discretionary. But he notes that "existing demand for ISDN service is less than 1% of BA-MD's total customer base and is forecast to be about 3% by the end of the decade." This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Higher penetration rates have already been achieved in Germany. BA-MD's application of measured rates to R-ISDN will dramatically suppress demand. The testimony of John Pehta [PEHT] demonstrates various reasons why the MRC of R-ISDN is higher than the MRC of POTS. This is undeniable; however, it does not affect usage costs. He notes that data calls have an average holding time of 20 minutes [PEHT at 13/15], but this is meaningless: The average CCS and average monthly hours of use are what consume traffic capacity. Data calls may be on average longer but they are fewer in number, and thus incur lower call setup costs (including processor usage and Signaling System 7 network utilization). He then states, "Because of the expected additional usage per line for R-ISDN customers, the average concentration ratio for a switch is expected to be 4 to 1 which allows for a switching module/line unit to provide service to only 256 customers." This is based on having 64 time slots per line unit, which is the case for analog line units on a 5ESS. ISDN line units have up to 256 time slots. And the situation on the DMS-100 is even more favorable. He then states that concentration ratios will "move closer to 1 to 1" [PETH at 14 /10], which implies an average ISDN usage of over 500 hours/month. This is more than an order of magnitude above Bell Atlantic's own estimates [KOEP at 5/13]. He then says that one ISDN switching module/line unit has 64 time slots, contradicting Reisinger's testimony. Again the problems he ascribes to ISDN users are in fact problems caused by analog data users. The net cost per minute of an ISDN data call, which I did not see because it is expurgated, is perhaps higher than the cost per minute of an ISDN voice call, due to the use of newer trunks. However, it is probably lower than the cost of an analog voice or voiceband data call, because it avoids the analog line units. The Reisinger-written Report to the FCC [BELL] states that an analog ISP port costs $75/month for its traffic load, versus $50/month for a PRI channel, with an average load of 608 minutes per day. This translates to $.0041 per minute for analog usage vs. $.0028 for PRI audio- bearer usage. Curt Koeppen's testimony[KOEP] seemingly seeks to contradict the other testimonies. He tries to show that Bell Atlantic's proposed tariff is really quite low. This follows from his assertion that the typical user's volume is quite low. This low volume usage is in fact consistent with other telco's experiences. Pacific Bell, for instance, cites in its current ISDN filing before the California PUC (docket A.95-12- 043) requesting a cap on off-peak hour unlimited usage) an average usage of 47 hours/month, which includes some percentage of "nailed" users and a majority of users originating under 20 hours/month. This is the result of a tariff that has unlimited usage except on Monday to Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM. He also cites average Internet and on-line service usage studies in the range of 9.9 to 47.3 hours per month, and says Bell Atlantic's own studies "show that typical residential Internet/On-line usage is only 10 to 40 hours per month" [KOEP at 27]. If this is the case, then why all the fuss about high traffic levels? Koeppen cites the recent Bell South filing [KOEP at 38/11] which caps "flat" rate at 200 hours per month, with 1 cent per overtime minute, as a means to discourage "nailed" users. Bell Atlantic certainly could use a similar mechanism to achieve nearly-flat rates for R-ISDN. This would be more palatable to the residential market. Indeed the Maryland public is so displeased with the possibility of mandatory measured service that legislation was passed to outlaw it. Under Bell Atlantic's proposal, then, users wanting flat rate or even nearly-flat-rate service would be encouraged to use analog lines. Koeppen also uses unsound reasoning in developing contribution margins. He states, "in deriving our margin above direct costs, our cost calculation for usage included only 90% utilization of the package usage allotment."[KOEP at 37/6] Thus someone who subscribes to the 60-hour package is expected to use 54 hours. This is clearly not valid. Subscribers generally do not know ahead of time their exact calling patterns, and Bell Atlantic's proposed rate structure gives positive incentives to buy a larger than necessary Callpack, because the overtime rate does not decline with usage. Thus a 35-hour user might be better off with a 60-hour Callpack, as 15 hours at 2c/minute costs $18/month, versus a $14 marginal cost for Callpack 60 over Callpack 20. A 90- hour user will be better off with Callpack 140 than with Callpack 60, even if all usage is off peak, as the former would cost $60 and the latter ($45+60*.01*30=) $63. Thus the average Callpack will be much less than 90% utilized. Experience also shows that residential users favor predictable, "flat" rates over measured rates, even if the latter are slightly lower. This will cause residential users to favor analog over ISDN, Centrex ISDN over R-ISDN, and larger Callpacks over "optimal" Callpacks that have a risk of overtime. Q3. Does this conclude your testimony? A3. Yes. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ INFORMATION POLICY NOTES is a free Internet newsletter sponsored by the Taxpayer Assets Project (TAP) and the Consumer Project on Technology (CPT). Both groups are projects of the Center for Study of Responsive Law, which is run by Ralph Nader. The LISTPROC services are provide by Essential Information. Archives of Info-Policy-Notes are available from http://www.essential.org/listproc/info-policy-notes/ TAP and CPT both have Internet Web pages. http://www.tap.org http://www.essential.org/cpt Subscription requests to info-policy-notes to listproc@tap.org with the message: subscribe info-policy-notes Jane Doe TAP and CPT can both be reached off the net at P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036, Voice: 202/387-8030; Fax: 202/234-5176 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ From: spinal@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Subject: Pay Phone Rates Likely to Rise Date: 10 Nov 1996 16:15:09 GMT Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas PAY PHONE RATES LIKELY TO RISE FCC denies states' petition to retain regulatory rights on charges By Juan B. Elizondo Jr. Associated Press The Public Utility Commission has lost its bid to retain control over pay phone rates in Texas, a move that could lead to higher prices. The PUC, which regulates the telephone and electric industries in Texas, joined regulators from other states last month in asking the Federal Communications Commission to reconsider an order that could allow pay phone ownres to raise rates throughout the country. Last summer, the Texas commission was all that stood between 50-cent pay phone calls and Texas consumers. The PUC rejected attempts by pay phone operators in Texas to raise rates to 50 cents per call. The agency did allow 25-cent charges for otherwise toll-free calls, except those made to preferred long distance companies. The FCC, in a reconsideration of its order released Friday, denied the states' petition to maintain rate regulation. The commission said the Federal Telecommunications Act approved the year urges deregulation. "We sought to eliminate those regulatory contraints that inhibit the ability both to enter and exit the pay phone marketplace, and to compete for the right to provide services to customers through pay phones," the FCC said in its reconsideration order. The new order makes technical changes but does not continue regulation of pay phone prices. Under the FCC decision, pay phone rates will continue to be regulated for one year after the order is implemented. Rates them will be set by market forces. Janee Bresemeister, a policy analyst for Consumers Union Southwest Regional Office, said the decision could hurt Texans. "This will result in higher prices," she said. Calls to the Texas Pay Phone Association were not returned Friday. A spokeswoman for the PUC said the agency had not reviewed the decision and could not comment. Under federal and state rules, prices for some pay phones could continue to be regulated. Those include so-called "public interest" phones, like those in rural areas, around low-income areas, and near hospitals. From the Austin American-Statesman, Sunday, November 10, 1996. Page B4. spinal@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 04:15:20 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Telecommunications Technology Handbook" by Minoli BKTLTCHB.RVW 960721 "Telecommunications Technology Handbook", Daniel Minoli, 1991, 0-89006-425-3, U$89.00 %A Daniel Minoli %C 685 Canton St., Norwood, MA 02062 %D 1991 %G 0-89006-425-3 %I Artech House %O U$89.00 617-769-9750 800-225-9977 fax: +1-617-769-6334 %O artech@world.std.com bookco@artech.demon.co.uk %P 772 %T "Telecommunications Technology Handbook" The author's stated object, in writing this book, was to write a contemporary text on telecommunications issues. In this objective he only partially succeeded. This is a good thing, since it means that Minoli's work has a classic value, while still being fairly up to date. Thus, this book becomes a broadly based and quite useful reference to all kinds of aspects of telecommunications. Technical details are not lacking, although specialists will want more depth in their particular areas. It is interesting to see that even five years have changed at least the emphasis in some areas: Minoli mentions ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) as a side issue of ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) rather than the reverse which has come to be the current norm. Still, the quality of the content means that this text is by no means out of date. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKTLTCHB.RVW 960721. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associate publications. ============== Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | "In questions of science, the Institute for rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | authority of a thousand is not Research into Rob.Slade@f733.n153.z1/| worth the humble reasoning User .fidonet.org| of a single individual." Security Canada V7K 2G6 | - Galileo ------------------------------ Subject: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 02:37:35 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (I'm wondering what they mean by "peak times" in the article below, since the net is international. Are they talking about charging variable rates based upon your local time? Actually, I wonder sometimes how much slowness is based on one's ISP, how they are configured, and the quality and bandwidth of their connection to the net? I've noticed that my service is much faster at home with seanet.com using a 33.6 kbps modem than it is at Virtual Commons, a local internet cafe that has multiple terminals and a fractional T1 connection. When I access the web sites I am interested in from home, things go pretty fast, but perhaps I am not trying to get into some of the more popular and jammed websites. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com Seattle, WA) Higher Fees at Peak Hours Might Ease Logjams, According to U. Texas Study By Lori Hawkins, Austin American-Statesman, Texas Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Nov. 7--People pay more to make long-distance phone calls during peak times. Soon, Internet surfers may do the same. A team of University of Texas researchers thinks the only way to keep the World Wide Web from becoming the World Wide Wait is to charge more when it's crowded. "If you want to get on the Web during a busy time, you should pay more for it," says Andrew Whinston, a UT business professor who headed the study along with Dale Stahl, a UT economics professor. It may be money well spent for millions of Internet users tired of staring at the "waiting for response" message at the bottom of their screens as their computer connects to a Web site. The five-year study used computer models to simulate the Internet, a global network of computers where at any moment tens of thousands of users may be trying to get through to popular sites. An estimated 30 million people have access to the Internet, and traffic is doubling every nine months. The result is major traffic jams. Pricing, the study showed, would keep users who don't have immediate needs off-line during peak times. Now, using the Internet costs the same whether it's 3 a.m. or 3 p.m. "You've got millions of people online looking for sports scores, stock market reports, news, dirty pictures, you name it," he says. "There's no way to sort out urgent needs from casual needs. If you start charging, there will be a lot more people who are willing to wait for a less congested time." No one knows how much it would cost to cruise in the fast lane. That would be up to Internet access providers, and although most favor the idea, no one has put a clear price tag on it. How busy the Web is depends on where you are and where the site is that you're accessing. Traffic typically begins building after lunch and bogs down from there. A lull usually occurs during dinner hours and builds again throughout the evening. When a big event such as the Olympics or a hurricane occurs, more people squeeze their way online, making traffic jams unavoidable. Tuesday's elections slowed movement as users logged on to check results. The Internet has gotten so sluggish that some universities including the University of California at Berkeley have begun a movement to break away and start a new network. The study showed that investing billions of dollars to add lines with more capacity isn't the answer. "It doesn't make economic sense," Whinston says. "If you introduce pricing, it will take care of itself." At least one Internet user is resigned to the pay-as-you-go system. "I don't like it, but I'm afraid that's what it's going to come to," says Lindsey Allen, a network systems administrator at AMD and an avid home computer user. "It's getting more and more difficult to do anything on the Internet. Sometimes it's so crowded you can't even log on." Allen avoids the crush by logging on late in the morning or late at night. "It's sad, because once we start charging, there will be no return," he says. For pay-as-you-go on the Internet, Whinston likes the phone service model. Users would pay a basic monthly fee for access and a meter would charge them according to when they were online and for how long. The user's Internet browser would say how busy the system is. Users could either get on using a fast connection at a premium price, get on with a slower connection at a cheaper rate or get on when traffic slows. "It would all come down to how much you were willing to spend," Whinston says. For example, downloading the Cable News Network's home page from the Web would cost 0.6 cents with a slow connection during a congested time, or 2.7 cents with a fast connection during a congested time. A fast connection would occur almost immediately, while a slow one could take minutes. Internet access providers say charging according to usage is the best way to support the Net's growth. "The building of the Internet was funded by the government, and the administrative costs have been provided by universities and major corporations," says Ken Jackson, chief operating officer of Illuminati Online, an Austin access provider. "All that has come to a screeching halt. The government is no longer in the business. And somebody's got to pay for it." Now major telecommunications companies like MCI and AT&T are doing the building, and they're going to pass on the expense. "When you start charging, people will start using the Web more efficiently," he says. "It's a simple concept, and it will work." The National Science Foundation and the Texas Advanced Research Agency contributed about $500,000 to the study. To see the full UT study, go to http://cism.bus.utexas.edu -------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that from my location here, things have become horrible. Having a 28.8 modem on the line means absolutely nothing. I might as well go back to having a 300 baud modem. All the newcomers with their web pages have turned the Internet into a terrible disaster. I strongly favor what Berkeley is proposing: start an entirely new network and abandon this current one entirely, leaving it to the companies who seem to feel they have to use all sorts of graphics and sounds and other bandwidth/resource-wasting spectacles on their web pages for the benefit of people who like 'surfing the net', which is a category of people I generally dislike anyway. I have to sit here and watch my keystrokes bounce back to me five and ten seconds after I type them thanks to people like that who want to download some gaudy display from someone's web page. I do not think ever in the past the congestion has been as bad as it has been the past year or so. Mail delivery takes absolutely *forever*; there are people getting the Digest as long as a day or two days after it is issued here. I can recall when the entire mailing list was finished in a matter of several hours. Yes, by all means, turn this over to the net-surfers and let's move elsewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #607 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 12 12:12:32 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA22511; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 12:12:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 12:12:32 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611121712.MAA22511@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #608 TELECOM Digest Tue, 12 Nov 96 12:12:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 608 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "Content Inflation" Means Cable Modems Will Beat xDSL (Lawrence Gasman) TIME-97: Final CFP (Mehmet Orgun) Country Code 2 for Canada? (was NANP Needs Clean Up) (Leonard Erickson) Ameritech Questions (Steven R. Kleinedler) Telephone Network Congestion Hype (Monty Solomon) Question For Bell-Owned ISPs (was Re: Internet Gridlocks) (Craig Nordin) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Dave Levenson) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (Albert Pang) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: ldg@cir-inc.com (Lawrence Gasman) Subject: "Content Inflation" Means Cable Modems Will Beat xDSL Date: 12 Nov 1996 10:16:47 -0500 Organization: Mail to Usenet Gateway [ News release reposted from http://www.cir-inc.com/news/netImplications.html ] NEWS RELEASE Communications Industry Researchers, Inc. PO Box 5387 Charlottesville, VA 22905 Contact: Lawrence Gasman (804) 984-0245 (804) 984-0247 (fax) Phone: (804) 984 0245 x 11 http://www.cir-inc.com/ e-mail: ldg@cir-inc.com "Content Inflation" Means Cable Modems Will Beat xDSL in Race for Internet Access, Says New CIR Report Charlottesville, Virginia: Despite the flurry of excitement about digital subscriber line technologies, it will be cable modems that will be bringing broadband content into our homes and offices. So says Internet Implications: What Building the Internet Will Mean for Service Providers and Their Suppliers, a new report from Communications Industry Researchers, Inc., a market research and consulting firm based here. Future broadband content on the Internet will vary from the sublime -- instantaneous walk-throughs of potential vacation spots -- to the ridiculous -- video chats with celebrities -- to the merely useful -- realtime business information. But getting to this content will require access speeds that are orders of magnitude higher than those provided by modems and ISDN terminal adaptors. Today, two separate research programs offer a road forward in the broadband access area. One is digital subscriber line technology, which utilizes existing copper loops and newly developed modulation schemes. The other is so-called cable modems, which are based on hybrid fiber coax (HFC) architectures for local distribution. "The choice between the two programs has been falsely presented as a battle between the telephone companies and the cable companies," says Lawrence Gasman, project director for Internet Implications, "But telcos, such as Pacific Bell, SNET and BellSouth, use HFC architectures too. Scalability is the real issue." CIR's new report notes that today there is little to choose between the digital subscriber line technology and cable modem technology in terms of data rates. Cable modems support 30 Mbps on a single cable television channel, while the most available "flavor" of DSL technology -- Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) -- promises 9 Mbps. However, bottlenecks between the PC and the network in the case of both types of technology and the fact that HFC is a shared bandwidth technology bring down the actual delivery to each home to between 1.5 and 3 Mbps. "Both xDSL and cable modems are extensible, says Gasman, "and both have their place in the short- to medium-term marketplace, but the DSL program will ultimately run out of steam." Internet Implications points out that broadband modem-to-service provider interconnection can be improved by replacing Ethernet with Fast Ethernet, or ATM and the latest versions of DSL promise up to 53 Mbps over short distances. But CIR's study also notes that in the end, fiber has a far greater information capacity than any copper-based system. "The sky's the limit with fiber," claims CIR's Gasman. "With HFC, all you have to do is to have fewer homes per hub or devote more cable channels to data. Or you can make use of new capacity on dark fiber. Taking this approach, you can pump any amount of data you choose into homes or offices." A cynic might point to the fact that a few Megabits per second flowing into a home would be enough to access realtime compressed moderate-quality video and ask why we should bother with order-of-magnitude improvements. But CIR believes this attitude to be naive. It claims that broadband communications will follow a similar pattern to what has occurred in personal computing over the past decade. "Just a few years ago, many of us thought a 386 machine with 4 MB of RAM and a 30 MB hard disk would last us forever. Now there is hardly a serious application that could run on such a machine," says Gasman. "We expect to see something similar happen in the area of broadband access." What CIR is predicting is that for any given access speed, content developers will push the capabilities of the available bandwidth until there is a strong incentive for users to move to higher speeds, just as applications that taxed a 386 caused users to run out and buy 486s and Pentiums. And just as the transformation in the PC market has occurred in a very few years, the requirement for very high-speed access can be expected to emerge rapidly. According to Internet Implications, this requirement will also be accentuated as multiple simultaneous accesses to the Internet occur in homes and small offices. High-speed access to the Internet is only one of many questions addressed in Internet Implications. The report also contains: an analysis and forecast of the development of the Internet backbones; detailed profiles of the strategies of the leading Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and the hardware and software companies that supply equipment for the ISPs; and ten-year forecasts of the growth of the Internet infrastructure. The Table of Contents for Internet Implications is available at CIR's Web site ( or directly at ). It is priced at $7,000 and is also available in HTML and PDF formats. Further details of this study can be obtained from Robert Nolan at 617-484-2077 or . Communications Industry Researchers, Inc., has been in business since 1979. The company publishes market studies and newsletters, and carries out demanding custom market research assignments on the commercial aspects of new communications technologies. # # # # # # # ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 10:47:42 +1100 From: Mehmet ORGUN Subject: TIME-97: Final CFP Reply-To: Mehmet ORGUN TIME-97 Fourth International Workshop on Temporal Representation and Reasoning Daytona Beach, Florida, USA May 10-11, 1997 FINAL CALL FOR PAPERS The purpose of this workshop is to bring together active researchers in the area of temporal representation and reasoning in Artificial Intelligence. Through paper presentations and discussions, the participants will exchange, compare, and contrast results in the area. The workshop is planned as a two day event to immediately precede FLAIRS-97 (Ninth Annual Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Symposium May 10-14; see http://erau.db.erau.edu/~towhid/workshops-97.html and the TIME Web page http://www.cs.uregina.ca/~temporal/index.html for details), or contact the program chairs at {morris,lina}@cs.fit.edu. Workshop participants are also encouraged to submit papers to FLAIRS and attend the conference. TIME-97 will be conducted as a combination of paper presentations, a poster session, invited talks and panel discussions. The format will provide ample time for discussions and exchange of ideas. Submission of high quality papers describing mature results or on-going work are invited for all areas of temporal representation and reasoning, including, but not limited to: temporal logics and ontologies temporal constraint reasoning temporal languages and architectures continuous versus discrete time point versus interval representations expressive power versus tractability belief and uncertainty in temporal knowledge temporal databases and knowledge bases temporal learning and discovery reasoning about actions and events time and nonmonotonism time and constraints time in problem solving (e.g. diagnosis, qualitative physics,...) multiple agents, communication, and synchronization applications To maximize interaction among participants, the size of the workshop will be limited. Accepted papers will be invited for full presentation or a poster presentation. All submissions must be received by December 5, 1996. Notification of acceptance or rejection will be sent to the first author (or designated author) by February 19, 1997. Prospective participants should submit 5 copies of a 6-8 page paper (indicating the selected areas) to: TIME-97 Program Chairs (Robert Morris and Lina Khatib) Computer Science Program Florida Institute of Technology 150 University Blvd. Melbourne, FL 32901 (407) 768-8000, Ext. 7290 {morris,lina}@cs.fit.edu Electronic submission is also permitted. Send a postscript file via anonymous ftp to: ftp://cs.fit.edu/pub/time97 WORKSHOP HIGHLIGHTS The workshop will be held in world famous Daytona Beach. Warm May Florida breezes will put the participants in the mood for invigorating discussion of issues in temporal reasoning. The technical discussions will be held for two complete days just prior to FLAIRS-97. We are pleased to announce that Mark Boddy and Patrick Hayes will be giving the invited talks for the Workshop. PUBLICATION OF ARTICLES All accepted papers will be published in the workshop proceedings, to be published by IEEE Press. As well, a selected subset of the papers will be invited for inclusion (subject to refereeing) in a book or in a special issue of a journal. ORGANIZATION GENERAL Chair: Patrick Hayes, University of West Florida PROGRAM COMMITTEE Chairs: Robert Morris and Lina Khatib, Florida Institute of Technology PROGRAM COMMITTEE Frank Anger, University of West Florida, USA Luca Chittaro, Universita' di Udine, Italy Philippe Dague, Universite Paris-Nord, France Jennifer Elgot-Drapkin, Arizona State University, USA Marcelo Finger, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brasil Michael Fisher, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK Antony Galton, University of Exeter, UK Michael Georgeff, Australian AI Institute, Australia Malik Ghallab, LAAS-CNRS, France Scott Goodwin, University of Regina, CA Hans Werner Guesgen, University of Auckland, NZ Peter Haddawy, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA Howard Hamilton, University of Regina, CA Lina Khatib (co-chair), Florida Institute of Technology, USA Peter Ladkin, Universitaet Bielefeld, Germany Gerard Ligozat, Universite Paris XI, France Rob Miller, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, UK Angelo Montanari, Universita' di Udine, Italy Robert Morris (co-chair), Florida Institute of Technology, USA Bernhard Nebel, Albert-Ludwigs University, Germany Han Reichgelt, University of the West Indies, Jamaica Mark Reynolds, Kings College, UK Maarten de Rijke, University of Warwick, UK Abdul Sattar, Griffith University, Australia Erik Sandewall, Linkoping University, Sweden Andre Trudel, Acadia University, Canada Lluis Vila, University of California Irvine, USA ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Patrick Hayes General Chair Lina Khatib PC Co-Chair Bob Morris PC Co-Chair Howard Hamilton Treasurer Luca Chittaro Publicity Co-Chair Angelo Montanari Publicity Co-Chair Scott Goodwin Organizing Committee Member Fahiem Bacchus Organizing Committee Member David Leasure Organizing Committee Member SPONSORING ORGANIZATIONS Sponsorship for TIME-97 is being sought from the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), and the Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society (FLAIRS). SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT DATES December 5, 1996 Submission deadline February 19, 1996 Notification of acceptance April 15, 1997 Camera-ready copy deadline May 10-11, 1997 TIME-97 Workshop May 10-14, 1997 FLAIRS-97 Conference ------------------------------ Subject: Country Code 2 For Canada? (was Re: NANP Needs to be Cleaned Up) From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 21:49:58 PST Organization: Shadownet In comp.dcom.telecom is written: > You have to be careful about assuming anything about dialing methods. > I have a friend from New Zealand who used her NZ calling card to dial > to me. (I cannot remember exactly where she was at the time, but I > believe she was in North America). > When she got her bill in NZ, it said that she had dialed: > She dialed country code 1, area code 514 followed by seven digits. > (Montreal.) > On her bill, NZ Telecom thought she had dialed: > 2514nnnnnnn > And NZ Telecom then interpreted this as country 251 followed by an 8 > digit telephone number beginning with 4. > She was therefore billed for a call to Ethiopia instead of Canada :-( > (251 is Ethiopia) She did manage to get charges fixed when it was > realised that 8 digit phone numbers do not exist in Ethiopia! > However, this has made me think that Canada really has a country code > of "2" instead of the common "1". > Can anyone comment on the use of "2" as a country code for Canada? Not a chance. No country code may start with a a digit or digit sequence that is a valid country code. So any single digit country code means that no other country code can start with that digit. Any two digit country code "locks out" the possibility of a three digit code starting with the same two digits. So if Canada was country code 2, no other country code could start with that digit. What almost certainly happened is that there was an error in recording the digit on the phone company's equipment. They don't generate the bills when you make the call. They just record the number dialed, the start time, and end time of the call, usually on computer tape. Then, later the tapes are read by the computer that generates the bills. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ From: srkleine@midway.uchicago.edu (steven r kleinedler) Subject: Ameritech Questions Organization: The University of Chicago Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:05:59 GMT 1. On their web page, on the page that shows the map of 773/312, why can't they have a real map showing real boundaries? All there is is a not-to-scale drawing of Chicago with a fuzzy clump centered on the Loop. Well, DUH. Is there no existing actual map showing actual boundaries available anywhere? (If anyone does know of such, please post the URL.) 2. A theatre company I'm a part of is in 773. We have voice mail. When I access our voice mail from another phone, and I have to punch # and the 10-digit number. 773-404-XXXX does not get me to our voice mail; I still have to use 312-404-XXXX. When does Ameritech switch over its voice mail box system to accurately reflect the area code? -- And, lest you think I'm being too critical, a nice note: The new 411 service where we can get a directory assistance anywhere in the US (for 25 or 35 cents or whatever it is anymore) is quite a nice deal. (Unless there's plans to jack up the cost ...) This message has been brought to you by Steve Kleinedler. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 00:55:02 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Telephone Network Congestion Hype Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 00:42:22 -0500 (EST) From: James Love Subject: Telephone Network Congestion Hype ----------------------------------------------------------------- Info-Policy-Notes - A newsletter available from listproc@tap.org ----------------------------------------------------------------- INFORMATION POLICY NOTES November 4, 1996 Telephone Network Congestion Hype In recent months there have been a rash of reports that the telephone network is suffering congestion from Internet usage. There is much reason to be skeptical of such claims. One reason is that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have more customers than telephone lines -- most ISP's have 10 to 20 residential customers per incoming line -- which makes it impossible for more than 5 to 10 percent of their customers to be connected to the network at one time. Telephone companies are also actively promoting second telephone lines, which are often purchased for use with modems, the putative source of congestion. PacBell, one of the firms complaining the most about Internet users, is now giving away 5 months of free Internet usage to persons who purchase a 2nd phone line. [See: http://www.pacbell.com/ideas-offers/offers/addline/j-second.html] This is a portion of our testimony on this topic in a Maryland PSC proceeding, followed by a note by Roger Bohn that was posted to com-priv on the same topic. jamie BEFORE THE MARYLAND PUBLIC SERVICES COMMISSION In the Matter of the Residential ) Intellilinq BRI Service Offering ) Case 8730 of Bell Atlantic, Maryland, Inc. ) October 15, 1996 PREPARED TESTIMONY OF JAMES PACKARD LOVE on behalf of CONSUMER PROJECT ON TECHNOLOGY Q13. What about network congestion? A13. There is no evidence that ISDN is causing any network congestion. Nor is there much evidence that personal computers are causing network congestion. While it may be the case that lines for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are used heavily at certain times of the day, it does not follow that residential users are causing problems. Telephone networks are fixed cost plants. The cost of the network is determined by the build-out at any given time, regardless of usage. The only "usage" cost is based upon the "build-out" for peak usage. The residential network is built according to certain assumptions regarding usage. The important issue is the proper "capacity" for the system. People who use the Internet as dial-in users don't dial in all at once. They just don't. People have complicated lives. They eat, sleep, go to school, go to the movies, play with their children, and do other things which don't involve the Internet. What do we know about Internet usage? We know that ISPs do not have one line per customer. They have far less than one line. According to responses from ISPs, most firms have between 10 and 20 customers per incoming line. That means simply that only 5 to 10 percent of their customers can be using the service at any given time. If ISPs only have one line for every 10 to 20 customers, then BA has to show that the residential network is build for less than 5 to 10 percent of the customers to be connected at one time. If they can't show that, then they do not have a case for charging for usage. Q14. What about congestion at the ISPs? A14. ISPs, like other businesses, may use lines intensely. That isn't necessarily bad for BA, because BA is selling telecommunications services to the people who make the incoming calls. For example, BA is promoting the sale of second telephone lines. These POTS lines do not generate much in long distance revenue. They are used mostly for teenagers, modems and faxes. When BA sells an apparently profitable POTS line so a consumer can call an ISP, BA is making money on the sale of the residential POTS line. If the residential consumer could not call an ISP, many consumers wouldn't need the second POTS line. The ISP is generating a demand for something that BA sells -- residential lines. Q15. Should ISP's pay higher fees? A15. BA has a practical monopoly in the residential market, and they are also an active ISP. You can't allow BA to discriminate against their rivals in the ISP business. Lots of businesses make intensive use of their lines. Our organization has a PBX, and it is often congested during the day. ISP's should pay the same rates as other businesses pay for their lines. -------------------------------------- Note by Roger Bohn on PacBell's 2nd line promotion to com-priv mailing list. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 4 Nov 1996 16:07:57 -0500 From: Roger Bohn Subject: Re: Sales of second phones, a major profit driver At 1:30 PM -0500 11/4/96, Sean Donelan wrote: > Compared to the doom and gloom studies Bell Atlantic and other RBOCs > published last month about how the Internet is ruining the telephone > network, this quarter's financials statements are positively perky. > Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO > Affiliation given for identification not representation Last Thursday (?) I heard a long story about this "growing problem" on Marketplace, the NPR-carried business news program. The story was, as most are, completely one-sided. It talked about the COST incurred because of longer phone calls, but nothing about the REVENUES. That night I got home and found, in my mail, an aggressive solicitation from: !! Pacific Bell!! for a second phone line. And, as an inducement if you get a second line they offered to throw in: 5 months free, including unlimited usage, on their new Internet service! So obviously their marketing people believe the opposite of what their PR people are saying. To me their PR smells of a standard attempt by a regulated (quasi) monopoly to influence the California regulators. Roger Bohn Rbohn@UCSD.edu University of California, San Diego ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ INFORMATION POLICY NOTES is a free Internet newsletter sponsored by the the Consumer Project on Technology (CPT) and the Taxpayer Assets Project (TAP). Both groups are projects of the Center for Study of Responsive Law, which is run by Ralph Nader. The LISTPROC services are provided by Essential Information. Archives of Info-Policy-Notes are available from http://www.essential.org/listproc/info-policy-notes/. TAP and CPT both have Internet Web pages, http://www.essential.org/cpt, http://www.tap.org. Subscription requests to info-policy-notes to listproc@tap.org with the message: subscribe info-policy-notes Jane Doe TAP and CPT can both be reached off the net at P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036; Voice: 202/387-8030; Fax: 202/234-5176. ------------------------------ From: cnordin@vni.net (Craig Nordin) Subject: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs (was Re: Internet Gridlocks) Date: 12 Nov 1996 11:15:56 -0500 Organization: Virtual Networks I would love to find out what the Bell-owned ISPs say about this ISP vs. Bell issue (ISPs said to cause telco gridlock). If they say "no comment" isn't that an indication that they are not as independent as they should be? If they say "we are with the Bell Companies" isn't that just a completely convincing sign that these companies are way too close to their parent organizations? If they say "we are with the ISPs, down with Bell" wouldn't it be amusing and entertaining? Can anyone find any statements made by Bell-owned ISPs on this issue? Jobs - Graphic Arts - Commercial Production -> http://studio.vni.net/jobs/ Virtual Networks Premier Internet Services cnordin@vnii.net Indianapolis Indianapolis Indianapolis Metro http://www.vnii.net/ Indiana Indiana Indiana Washington DC Washington DC Washington DC Metro http://www.vni.net/ Virtual Networks Incorporated Virtual Networks of Indiana, Incorporated ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 16:35:51 GMT John Stahl (aljon@worldnet.att.net) writes: > Could it be that they really want to is charge for every call based > upon distance and time. Perhaps if given their own way, they would opt > to eliminate Flat Rate Service! That is already the case in some areas, and for some classes of customers. If you purchase flat-rate local telephone service, then you are subsidized by somebody else -- especially if you use more of the service than an `average' subscriber of your class. As we move from regulation to competition, the justification of a subsidy paid by one class of users to another becomes more difficult. It is the payers of the subsidy (e.g. business subscribers) who will be able to save money by switching to an access provider who does not collect such a subsidy. The recipients of the subsidy (e.g. residence subscribers) will find that the incumbent LEC will have to charge them more as the subsidy is lost. Pay-as-you-use is likely the way of the future (except in areas where it is currently the way of the present). The right solution to the Internet connectivity issue is to use a non-switched infrastructure (e.g. CATV). Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 03:58:38 +0000 From: albert pang Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? Organization: Magellan Networks, Nortel, Ottawa, Canada. In article , John Nagle wrote: > In article , scott miller > writes: >> Dial-up data traffic has been getting a free ride on the Telco voice >> network for years. That is coming to an end. The question is, who is >> going to pay? > This whole thing seems a sort of bogus issue. First, unless > you're out behind some switching concentrator in outside plant, which > is rare, you have a dedicated path to the CO, so contention there > isn't an issue. Within the end office, you can run out of switch > capacity on some older switches, although I think this is more of a > problem with 5ESS than Northern Telecom switches. Can someone speak > to this? I don't want to sound too much like a commercial, but check out the following press releases for a possible solution: http://www.nortel.com/home/press/1996c/8_28_96235Internet_Thruway.html http://www.nortel.com/home/press/1996d/11_8_9696331Internet_Thru_Update.html Albert Pang | Global Support Processes | Voice +1 613 723 4204 albertp@nortel.ca | Magellan Networks | Fax +1 613 723 4508 | Northern Telecom (Nortel) | ESN 364 4204 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #608 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 12 14:23:08 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA08069; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 14:23:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 14:23:08 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611121923.OAA08069@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #609 TELECOM Digest Tue, 12 Nov 96 14:22:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 609 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Search Warrants by Fax in Ontario, Canada (Nigel Allen) Book Review: "Personal Communication Systems and Technology" (Rob Slade) O'Reilly/Netcraft Security Test (Ben Parker) UCLA Short Course on "Evolutionary Computation" (Bill Goodin) Help Needed With Answering Machine (John Geddie) Texas PUC Approves Two Splits (Brian Purcell) Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service (Michael Wengler) Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service (Mark Tomlinson) New Creative Trends in Spamming (Mike Pollock) Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Dale Kramer) Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line (Larry English) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 12 Nov 1996 10:13:51 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Search Warrants by Fax in Ontario, Canada Here is a press release from the Attorney General of the province of Ontario. I found the press release on the Canada NewsWire web site at http://www.newswire.ca/ (I should stress that I don't work for the government of Ontario, and I disagree with most policy initiatives of the present government of Ontario. However, I thought that the announcement might be of interest to readers of this newsgroup.) ACCESS BY FAX TO JUSTICES OF THE PEACE WILL BOOST COMMUNITY SAFETY TORONTO, Nov. 7 /CNW/ - Ontario will launch a new service to help police fight crime and protect our communities, Attorney General Charles Harnick announced today. The new service, called telewarrants, will allow police officers across the province to use a fax machine to apply for a search warrant from a justice of the peace. Eventually the service will be available 24-hours per day, seven days a week. At a speech to justices of the peace, the Attorney Gcneral said the telewarrant service is an example of the government's commitment to promoting community safety, and building a swifter, more effective justice system. ``Often the success of a criminal investigation hinges on timely police access to a justice of the peace to apply for a search warrant,'' said Mr. Harnick. ``This new telewarrant service gives police access by fax to a centrally located justice of the peace, when one is not available in person. ``No longer will police investigations be at risk because of difficulty accessing a justice of the peace,'' he added. ``By adopting modern technology in the justice system, we will help police crack down on criminals.'' The telewarrant centre will make a justice of the peace available by fax at all hours of the day or night. Police will fax their request for a search warrant to the centre, where a justice of the peace reviews the application. If it is approved, the justice of the peace then faxes it back to the police. ``The new telewarrant service is one more very important weapon in our arsenal against criminal activity,'' said Chief Trevor McCagherty, president of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police. ``The front-line police officer in Ontario will benefit from the direct access, soon to be available to them, in obtaining a search warrant. The time saved by our police officers in using the telewarrant service will translate into increased public safety for every citizen.'' The telewarrant service will be phased in, starting in early 1997. It will be accessible to all municipal and regional police services, as well as the Ontario Provincial Police, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and peace officers working for the Ministries of Transportation, Natural Resources, and Environment and Energy. Search warrants authorize police to enter private property to search for and seize evidence during a criminal investigation. The Criminal Code of Canada requires police officers to appear in person before a judge or justice of the peace to apply for a search warrant. Last year, the Code was amended to allow police to apply for a search warrant by fax, when it is not practicable or possible to get authorization in person from a judicial officer. Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Quebec and the Yukon all have telewarrant services in place. ``Ontarians have the right to feel secure in their own homes and neighbourhoods,'' emphasized Mr. Harnick. ``And safe communities enhance our quality of life, by promoting investment, jobs and economic growth.'' Telewarrants is one of several community safety announcements the government has made during the month of November. Ce document est aussi disponible en franais. For further information: Elaine Thompson, Public Education and Community Relations, (416) 326-2215; Jim Middlemiss, Minister's Office, (416) 326-4443 transmitted over Canada NewsWire 12:10e 07-NOV-96 ------------------- forwarded to the TELECOM Digest by Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen/telecom.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually I suspect most police officers here in the USA at least consider the requirement to get search warrants a nuisance they would rather not bother with. Most do not see any reason they should not be allowed to just kick down doors and go anywhere they want without having to bother with any constitutional requirements which protect citizens and their privacy. For a long time now, at least a few years, fax warrants have been available in the USA. True, someone has to appear before a judge and request it, but that is just a formality they go through when necessary. As an example, let's say police come to your door and want to come in. There are a few people around who are brave enough -- but I think the number is growing -- who respond by telling the police to go away and come back with a warrant if they wish to enter. Police officer's response is usually to tell you that you are an a--hole and come in anyway, but if he thinks you are smart and likely to make trouble, then there is a simple way to have a warrant there in a few minutes: Officer calls on radio to the station, and asks assistant state's attorney on duty to prepare a warrant. The warrant is then taken to the judge on duty and signed. It is then faxed out to the 'paper car', a police car which drives around town all day delivering paperwork from one police station/courthouse to another. It arrives on the cellular fax machine in the 'paper car' and that officer delivers it to the officer who has been waiting patiently outside your front door for all of ten minutes or so. You say, "wait a minute; doesn't the idea of obtaining a search warrant via fax through some third-party violate the spirit if not the actual constitutional requirement that a judge be presented with evidence in person and that the judge make a (real! legitimate!) decision whether the police will be allowed to invade this person's space or otherwise harass him?" Well yeah, but that is not how things are done any longer in the United Police States of America. Obviously Canada is not going to be any different. Police officer decides who is a criminal and if you don't like that then you are a criminal also. COCOT phone is available for you and other scum like you to call your smart-mouth attorney and your scummy family and friends between 10-11 am on the second Tuesday of each week; administrative convenience you know. Most police would not let you use the phone at all if the Supreme Court was not in their face all the time about it. Millions of dollars spent on sophisticated communications equipment for law enforcement, yet persons not convicted of anything except maybe calling attention to the chip on a police officer's shoulder cannot get phone calls in any reasonable way at any reasonable price while in jail. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 12:15:16 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Personal Communication Systems and Technology" BKPCSTCH.RVW 960723 "Personal Communication Systems and Technologies", John Gardiner/Barry West (ed.), 1995, 0-89006-588-8, U$59.00 %E John Gardiner %E Barry West %C 685 Canton St., Norwood, MA 02062 %D 1995 %G 0-89006-588-8 %I Artech House %O U$59.00 617-769-9750 800-225-9977 fax: +1-617-769-6334 %O artech@world.std.com bookco@artech.demon.co.uk %P 238 %T "Personal Communication Systems and Technologies" This book is almost more political than it is technical, covering the various competing technologies in the PCS (Personal Communications Systems) fields. Relative strengths of the schemes are discussed, although, since the authors of the individual chapters are mostly adherents of their respective programs, weaknesses aren't dwelt on. Written from a European, and primarily UK, perspective, there are chapters for developments in the North American and Asian markets. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKPCSTCH.RVW 960723. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. ====================== roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: bparker@interaccess.com (Ben Parker) Subject: O'Reilly/Netcraft Security Test Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 16:18:37 GMT Organization: Best Effort Co. Reply-To: bparker@interaccess.com === Forwarded Message === On Sat, 12 Oct 1996 15:14:29 -0400, listown@online.ora.com (O'Reilly & Associates ORA-NEWS Owner) wrote: ora-news O'Reilly Product Announcement Free Trial Security Test of Your Internet Site In partnership with Netcraft Ltd., we are offering you a free, one-time security audit of your Internet site. This sophisticated remote probe will reveal how your network looks from the outside world and what its vulnerabilities are. The service comprises a methodical examination of the ports on all of the hosts on your network that can be seen from the Internet. It applies tests for common misconfigurations and security weaknesses in the services you offer to the Internet. THE TEST SUITE The test suite used is continually enhanced and updated in the light of CERT and vendor advisories, Usenet postings, and material from Netcraft's own research. Access to full advisories on the vulnerabilities and support by Internet mail are included in the free trial. BENEFITS OF THIS SERVICE If after having your site tested for free you deem it of value, it is available by annual subscription with tests repeated on a daily or weekly basis or at your instigation. You benefit because: * The Service is automated and repeatable, and can be run every day of the year, or on demand. This continuous service is much more useful than a one time security audit which, although a very good thing in itself, is out of date the next time someone changes a configuration file, or adds a new service to your network. * The tests are performed from outside of your own network and so give a clear picture of what services are accessible to the Internet at large. * You can have the test suite run on demand so that it is part of your working practices. When you or someone you work with makes a change to a configuration, you can run our tests immediately afterwards to check the impact. This can reduce the time taken to rectify excessively secure misconfigurations, such as accidently blocking all external access to a key service. * Our test suite is continually enhanced during the course of the subscription. As we find out about new security weaknesses, either through our own research and experience or from freely available sources such as CERT advisories and Usenet postings, we update the test suite accordingly. HOW TO GET THE FREE TRIAL Send email to Ann Schott, ann@ora.com, to sign up for your free network security trial. In your email include the Class C network number you want tested, your phone number, and your company's main switchboard number. Or fax the information on company letterheaded paper to 707/829-0414, care of Ann Schott. Brian ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Evolutionary Computation" Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 09:05:00 -0800 On February 19-21, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Evolutionary Computation: Principles and Applications", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Melanie Mitchell, PhD, Research Professor, Santa Fe Institute; Richard Belew, PhD, Associate Professor, Computer Science, UC San Diego; Lawrence Davis, PhD, President, Tica Associates; and Una-May Davis, PhD, Research Fellow, AI Laboratory, MIT. Each participant receives a copy of the book, " An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms", M. Mitchell (MIT Press 1996), and extensive course notes. This course introduces engineers, scientists, and other interested participants to the burgeoning field of evolutionary computation. Evolutionary computation -- genetic algorithms, evolution strategies, evolutionary programming, and genetic programming -- is a collection of computational techniques, inspired by biological evolution, to enhance optimization, design, and machine learning. Such techniques are increasingly used to great advantage in applications as diverse as aeronautical design, factory scheduling, bioengineering, electronic circuit design, telecommunications network configuration, and robotic control. Four of the leading experts in this field present the fundamentals of evolutionary computation which should enable participants to write their own evolutionary computation applications. The course includes detailed descriptions of many applications, as well as how to design genetic algorithms and other methods for problems of interest to the participants. Comparisons of genetic algorithms with other search and learning methods are discussed in the context of the example applications. The last day focuses on identifying promising areas for genetic algorithm optimization, and creating a genetic algorithm that performs well on your optimization problems. Course participants who wish to present a problem on the last day are encouraged to contact Dr. Davis (davis@tica.com; phone [617] 864-2292) prior to the course to determine its usefulness as an example. The instructors hope to use two examples to illustrate the points made on the final day. The course fee is $1395, which includes extensive course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For a more information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: johngee@nmia.com Date: Tue, 12 Nov 96 10:13 MST Subject: Help With Answering Machine I purchased an AT&T digital answering machine at a garage sale. It didn't have an instruction manual with it, and I need help trying to program it. It is a phone as well, with the handset on the left. On the right are a slide volume control and buttons marked "memo, delete, fwd, stop, repeat, off/on and play." An LED display shows the number of calls received. The only marking that *may* be a model number on the underside of the set is 91EP. If anyone can help by e-mailing me or faxing me the programming instructions, I'd be very grateful. John Geddie E-mail: johngee@nmia.com Fax: (505) 293-2112 ------------------------------ From: bpurcell@centuryinter.net (Brian Purcell) Subject: Texas PUC Approves Two Splits Date: Tue, 12 Nov 96 16:23:46 GMT Organization: Wide-Lite The Texas Public Utility Commission approved two NPA relief plans last week. Splits to the 210 and 817 areas will likely take effect next summer. Here are the details of the approved splits: 210: The San Antonio Metro Exchange (roughly Bexar County) will remain 210. The remainder of the outstate area currently in 210 will be split in half along the Webb County line north of Laredo. 817: The Fort Worth Metro Exchange and Extended Metro Exchanges to the North, West, and South will remain in 817. The balance of the current 817 will be split in half along a line running WSW from Ft. Worth. The new NPAs have been requested from Bellcore and are likely to be assigned by the end of November. Implementation is scheduled for mid-1997 with a four to six month permissive period and an undetermined intercept period. Brian Purcell bpurcell@centuryinter.net ------------------------------ From: Michael Wengler Subject: Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 08:34:02 -0800 Organization: QUALCOMM, Incorporated; San Diego, CA, USA Mike Borsetti wrote: > I ordered MCI One, and gave out the "personal 800 number" to selected ... > A while back I started getting complaints from these people that at > times when they called the 800 number they couldn't reach me or my > voicemail. A little bit of investigative work determined that MCI -- > without telling me -- changed the service so that after about 25 > seconds of ringing it would interrupt the call and tell the caller > "We're sorry, the party cannot be reached at this time, please try > your call later". This happens just a split second before the > voicemail has a chance to pick up. ... > (3) cancel MCI One and get a 'real' 800 number from another > vendor. Problem: look stupid in front of my associates and have them > memorize a different number [BTW, any ideas as to the best provider?] 800 numbers are portable, so there's no reason to look stupid! When you seek out another source for your 800 number, tell them you've already got an 800 number and you want them to service it. They will know what to do. Chances are your best deal will come through signing up for both home L.D. service and 800 number from the same company. I had 11.9 interstate w/ 6/sec billing and on my 800 number, 12.9 interstate with 6-second billing, but a 30-second minimum. NO MONTHLY FEE! (Unless my total bill was less than $20 in a month, they slapped a $5 billing fee on top.) That was with Unitel in New Jersey, 1-800-UNITEL7 Its MUCH better than you're going to do with the bigger companies. And paying them NO FEE for a few years makes me wonder why other companies charge a fee and get away with it. And I've had no technical problems ever with this company, 800 number or long distance. Mike Wengler Formerly an agent, but decided to concentrate on my real job. http://www.he.net/~wengler/VoiceNet [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A lot of the carriers are now including a provision in their contract which says you agree that when you give up their service you give up your right to the number as well, or any right to transfer it to a different carrier. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mtdiver@aol.com Subject: Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service Date: 10 Nov 1996 23:40:59 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) How does a home 800 number sound FREE OF CHARGE (setup and monthly) with your first two hours of use at $0.01 a minute with NO GIMMICKS from a major LD provider? E-mail me for details! Sincerely, Mark Tomlinson MTDIVER@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So tell us the rest of the story Mark. How much is the charge per minute after the first two hours? Be sure to include all the gimmicks when you write again, okay? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 08:35:50 -0800 From: Mike Pollock Subject: New and Creative Trends in Spamming I don't know if anyone else in the Digest got this, but I'm willing to be a *gulp* guinea pig. <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: starmaker@earthstar.com Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 18:48:31 -0800 To: pheel@sprynet.com Subject: May I Please Have Your Permission ?? You're probably losing a lot of money on your telephone bill (just like I was) and I was wondering if I could e-mail you some free information that could save you hundreds of dollars every year. I now save nearly $5 for every $10 I was spending. No one else who has seriously looked at this idea has saved less than $3 for every $10 they were spending on long distance. That reflects a 30% to 50% savings and that's a lot of money for most Americans, today!. I promise, no obligation. May I e-mail you the free information? I am against SPAM, and am therefore asking you to e-mail me your permission before I send you anything. ________________________________________ IF YOU DO NOT REPLY TO THIS REQUEST, I WILL NOT CONTACT YOU, AGAIN. ________________________________________ Hope to be your friend, A. J. (in North Carolina) <---- End Forwarded Message ----> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How clever. Spam asking permission to send spam. Or I guess you would say spam asking permission to send junk email. Or junk email asking permission to send more junk email. Or something. To answer your question Mike, yeah, lots of people got the above. I personally got my usual two or three copies from 'Friend'. But Mike, I like your second submission today even better. Let's look at it now, shall we? PAT] Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 07:58:04 -0800 From: Mike Pollock Subject: Vote Yes or No for SPAM!! >From our ironic irony department: I recently received this bit of spam calling for a vote on spamming. What 900 number will make the spamming stop? ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: "ryan", INTERNET:ryan@bmxi.com TO: (unknown), INTERNET:NOBODY@BMXI.COM DATE: 11/8/96 5:55 AM RE: Message from Internet Sender: ryan@bmxi.com Received: from bmxi.com ([199.75.109.11]) by dub-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA28032; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 05:46:09 -0500 Received: by bmxi.com from localhost (router,SLmail95 V2.1); Fri, 08 Nov 1996 02:46:48 Pacific Standard Time Received: by snappy from somewhere.com (0.0.0.0::mail daemon; unverified, SnappyMail V0.1,alpha 1); From: "ryan" Subject: To: nobody@bmxi.com Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 02:46:48 Pacific Standard Time Message-Id: <19961108024648.bm8704.in@bmxi.com> Vote Yes or No for SPAM!! The hottest issue on the Internet is unsolicited e-mail, affectionately referred to as SPAM. I've heard it said that stopping spam would be an infringement on one's right to free speech as well as freedom of the press. People on the other side say that unsolicited e-mail is an invasion of privacy. Which side are you on???? Most of you are aware of the battles in court (state and federal level) involving this issue. Because of the impact these legal decisions will have on us all I feel it necessary to voice my opinion as I hope you do. I don't know if public opinion can have a bearing on this issue but I intend to find out. I am conducting a survey and hope you will take part. The results of this survey will be published in 2 national publications as well as being posted on the appropriate news groups. The results will also be made available to the management of the online services on the Internet (aol, compuserve, ect. ). If you wish to take part in the survey and wish to contribute to the expense of publishing the results you can do so by calling:1-900-378-8388 a "YES" vote (In favor of unsolicited e-mail) will be recorded by selecting ext .# 1910 a "NO" vote (against unsolicited e-mail ) will be recorded by selecting ext. # 1911 let your opinion be known VOTE-VOTE-VOTE-VOTE-VOTE-VOTE-VOTE-VOTE-VOTE!! You will be charged $2.99 for your call and you must be at least 18 years old to participate. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Snicker: He does not indicate if it is okay for us to stuff the ballot box with repeated votes, but I somehow don't think he would mind; not at $2.99 per call anyway. Really this sort of thing had to happen. So let's all abuse our employer's phone lines to 'vote' on how we feel about others abusing the net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dale Kramer Subject: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: 12 Nov 1996 13:29:55 GMT Organization: Kramer Concepts Inc. Is there a service that I can use that allows me (in Canada) to call a toll number in the US and then get tied into a line that lets me call an 800 number that can not be normally dialed from Canada? Is there any way at all possible to call a US 800 number from Canada? Dale Kramer kci@vaxxine.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't we have something here not too long ago about a special three digit code used by some telco in Canada for just this purpose? Perhaps someone could contact Mr. Kramer with details. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Larry English Subject: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line Organization: national semiconductor atlanta Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 17:56:08 GMT Suddenly a new feature has appeared on my residential phone line. I noticed that if I'm talking to someone, I can "flash" the hookswitch, make another call [without disconnecting the first call], and then either confer with a second caller until they hang up, or I can flash again and then be talking to both callees. I haven't signed up for this; I definitely do not have [experiments proved this] call waiting; I am not doing anything special to make it happen [like dialing *6x or something]. Can I get charged for trying/using this? What is it even called? 3-way calling? Conference calling? It has also appeared on another phone at a house near me that probably uses the same central office. I don't really even want it -- it makes it hard to be sure when you have really terminated a call, since if you don't hold the hook down long enough, you might be making an accidental conference call. wle. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is known as 'Three Way Calling' and some telcos have begun offering it on a 'per-use' basis as well as by monthly subscription. If you call the telco, you can probably get them to remove it from your line if you don't want it. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #609 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 12 23:02:25 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA04192; Tue, 12 Nov 1996 23:02:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 23:02:25 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611130402.XAA04192@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #610 TELECOM Digest Tue, 12 Nov 96 23:02:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 610 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Len Levine Has Heart Attack (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Ian Angus) Re: Ameritech Questions (John Cropper) Re: ADSI Text-to-Audio File Utility? (Jonathan Story) Re: Percentage of Rotary / Pulse-Dial Phones? (Nils Andersson) Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers (Stanley Cline) Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers (Paul Robinson) Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? (Craig Nordin) New E-Mail SPAM Provider (David Richards) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 12 Nov 1996 19:20:49 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Len Levine Has Heart Attack Computer Privacy Digest moderator Len Levine suffered a heart attack in mid-October and after a stay of several days in Columbia Hospital in Milwaukee, WI is now resting at home. I know *just exactly* what he is going through. Recall please that I have had two of them. He has put his digest on hold pending his recovery, which I hope will be soon and complete. He has requested no 'get well/best wishes' email since the volume of email he gets is staggering enough, the same as it is for me. Long time readers will recall that Computer Privacy Digest began as an offshoot of a long discussion on privacy which began here in this Digest several years ago. Dennis Rears founded it, and Len Levine took over the moderation a couple years or so ago. Like Computer Underground Digest which also began as a discussion thread on hacking in this Digest, CPD has become a very popular e-zine on the net. My best wishes to Len Levine for a speedy recovery. I'm sure most of you feel the same way. PAT ------------------------------ From: Ian Angus Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 15:14:31 -0500 Organization: Angus TeleManagement Group Dale Kramer wrote: > Is there a service that I can use that allows me (in Canada) to call a > toll number in the US and then get tied into a line that lets me call > an 800 number that can not be normally dialed from Canada? Is there > any way at all possible to call a US 800 number from Canada? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't we have something here not too > long ago about a special three digit code used by some telco in > Canada for just this purpose? Perhaps someone could > contact Mr. Kramerwith details. PAT] BC Tel offers this, but it is available only in British Columbia. Several long distance carriers *used* to offer it when they had line-side access, but the feature was lost when they converted to trunk (ie "equal") access. It may still be available from some of the smaller line-side resellers -- that would depend on where Mr. Kramer is. Of course the real solution would be for US companies with 800 and 888 numbers to realize that they have potential customers outside of the 50 states. This is a continuing grievance for Canadians, who could dial the 800 numbers if only the companies advertising them would instruct their carriers to allow calls from Canada. It's even worse in other parts of the world -- it's astounding how many computer companies, for example, run ads which are seen world wide, with no method of contact except a US-only 800 or 888 number. IAN ANGUS ianangus@angustel.ca Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca 8 Old Kingston Road tel: 905-686-5050 ext 222 Ajax ON L1T 2Z7 Canada fax: 905-686-2655 ------------------------------ From: psyber@mindspring.com Subject: Re: Ameritech Questions Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 16:27:20 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com steven r kleinedler wrote: > 1. On their web page, on the page that shows the map of 773/312, why > can't they have a real map showing real boundaries? All there is is a > not-to-scale drawing of Chicago with a fuzzy clump centered on the > Loop. Well, DUH. Is there no existing actual map showing actual > boundaries available anywhere? (If anyone does know of such, please > post the URL.) The scale adjustment necessary is so radically different that any attempt on a broad-scale (~200 mi2) map will overstate the actual 312 area. > 2. A theatre company I'm a part of is in 773. We have voice mail. > When I access our voice mail from another phone, and I have to punch # > and the 10-digit number. 773-404-XXXX does not get me to our voice > mail; I still have to use 312-404-XXXX. When does Ameritech switch > over its voice mail box system to accurately reflect the area code? Have you placed a trouble ticket with Ameritech yet? > -- And, lest you think I'm being too critical, a nice note: The new > 411 service where we can get a directory assistance anywhere in the US > (for 25 or 35 cents or whatever it is anymore) is quite a nice > deal. (Unless there's plans to jack up the cost ...) Not really ... on the WWW, several sites do it for you for free (a few of which are sponsored by the LECs) ... John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 fax: 609.637.9430 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: jstory@ibm.net (Jonathan Story) Subject: Re: ADSI Text-to-Audio File Utility? Date: 12 Nov 1996 18:44:26 GMT Reply-To: jstory@ibm.net (Jonathan Story) In , fleury@cs.utexas.edu (Damon Erick Fleury) writes: > What I'd like to know is this: Is there any DOS, Unix or Windows > utility in existence that takes a string of text and builds a sound > file suitable to be played to an ADSI-compliant telephone? The idea is > that a PC with a voice modem or a Dialogic card could dial an ADSI > device and leave a message on its screen, by simply playing the encoded > sound file. > Does anyone know of (or sell) such a program? Using the Dialogic APIs, it is quite simple to produce an ADSI sequence (dl_play() in the OS/2 API). However, at least on the OS/2 platform, Dialogic have not produced an API to interpret ADSI tones. ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Percentage of Rotary / Pulse-Dial Phones? Date: 11 Nov 1996 19:11:44 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > Some localities are converting pay phones BACK to rotary to discourage > drug dealers/prostitutes from using them as beeper points. Why does this make a difference? If you call a service that needs beep tones, I imagine people who use payphones will carry DTMF generators? Besides, this is a horrible trend. Let's observe that phones do not sell drugs, sex or even rock-and-roll, people do. One of the nastier fallouts of the nanny-state (or nanny-govt-regulated- telco or nanny-govt-owned-school) is the trend to assume that anyone under 18 with a pager or a cellphone is a drug dealer. IMHO, these things can be great tools to enhance safety, and be a great convenience for parents and kids. (In Sweden, the developers talk about phone-with-mom-and-daddy-button, i.e. two speed dials plus the equivalent of 911). Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 01:10:05 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com On Wed, 06 Nov 1996 16:26:19 -0600, someone wrote: > I could not get AOL to set up an account using the VISA Debit card. It > would only work using a real VISA. The tech support people said name > and address had to match exactly what was on statement. Also if you I had AOL some time ago, and had them bill to a Visa check card with no problems at all. However, the American Roaming Network cellular ripoff folks will not take either of my Visa check cards (I have two) nor my perfectly valid BellSouth calling card number. (This is the outfit I have to deal with when using my BellSouth cellular phone in certain areas where awful US Cellular refuses to provide service and I have to roam on the A side.) They have not explained why I am having problems to my satisfaction yet; US Cellular and CellOne have already received more nasty-grams from me after I found this out. Here's a post from misc.consumers describing another Visa check-card problem ... From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Newsgroups: misc.consumers Subject: Declined VISA Check Card Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 21:08:27 GMT Has anyone had a problem with using a VISA check card, and it being declined because it's a "check card" and not a "credit card"? (No need to warn me about the dangers of debit cards, I am perfectly aware of that, thank you.) I tried to get gas at an Exxon gas station about 60 miles away from home; I gave them my VISA check card; the charges were declined (never mind that I KNOW I had more than enough in my checking account to cover a measly $6 charge. I went to an ATM nearby and withdrew cash (plus having to pay an ATM surcharge + my bank's foreign ATM fee) to pay for the gas.) The gas station claims that they do not accept VISA "check cards" -- even though they take VISA "*credit*" cards. I have had *no* problems with this card at any place (including other Exxon stations), so it appears this Exxon may be in trouble with VISA for this. I'm calling both Exxon and my bank Monday to get this little matter resolved ... I want my $2 for ATM withdrawal fees back. A VISA CARD IS A VISA CARD REGARDLESS OF WHERE THE FUNDS COME FROM, RIGHT? (My bank said they were having computer problems that day, so I forgive Exxon. But ARN *still* gripes about my Visa check cards.) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 All opinions are strictly my own! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On my VISA debit card there is no indication of any kind where the funds come from. They just swipe the card like any other. Although my VISA debit card will function like a Cash Station card as well, it so happens the bank also sent me an ATM card (good for cash machines only). One interesting thing I have noticed is that there seem to be different parameters or guidelines in how the two cards seem to respond to money in one's account. Let us say starting with zero dollars, I make a deposit *to a live teller* of a check for $500. The check will have a three day hold on it during which time the automated service giving my balance over the phone will say 'book balance five hundred; available balance, zero'. Now if I attempt to pay for something with my VISA debit card (on the very same account) it will draw funds from my credit card account in increments of fifty dollars as needed to pay for the purchase because I have 'no available funds' otherwise. But if I go to an ATM machine and take out fifty dollars instead, it will simply take the fifty from the 'unavailable funds' (book balance) on my checking account. Now if I make a deposit to my account via an ATM machine, for some reason the 'hold' is only one day. Also, First National Bank of Chicago has my card coded for something called 'daily limit' and 'overnight limit'. The daily limit is $300 which is more than enough. I have never taken more than $200 in cash from an ATM at one time for any reason. The 'overnight limit' is a curious thing however: let us say the network is down, or the bank's computers are down or for some reason verification of my balance cannot be made by by the ATM I am using. The bank says I can have $100 anyway on my say-so. Now of course there best be $100 there for them to recover when the computer/network connection comes back on line. I have gone into the Mobil station near my house and had them decline my VISA debit card only to hand them my ATM card on the very same account and have it accepted. This comes from the 'I feel like such a fool' department: One night I was walking downtown past an ATM built in the wall on the front of a building and it was going beep-beep-beep. I stopped to look and a message on the screen said 'Do you need more time to make your selection?'. The selections were to make a deposit, make a withdrawal, check 'my' balance, etc. Some fool had walked away without terminating his session ... still logged in. So what did this fool do? Instead of saying yes, give me another minute or so, I said 'no' ... and the ATM terminated the session and tossed 'my' card back out to me. Oh dear ... that was not the desired results, and not having a PIN to go with the card in question didn't help any. Had I said 'yes' the machine would have waited on me patiently while I cleaned out the rest of the poor guy's account. Put it down as a RISK of using ATM's I guess; do not forget to terminate the session and take your card with you, otherwise the next person to walk up may be more nimble with those buttons and have more presence of mind than I did at the unexpected sight of a treasure drove there for the looting. Finally from the bank fraud unit comes this 'do not try it or else' bit of advice about ATMs: Let's say you do not have quite enough money in your checking account to get a check cashed in the conventional way. You are going to get a very large -- more than adequate check the next day, but that does you no good tonight. Using one of your own (at this moment) worthless checks write yourself a loan. Deposit a check payable to yourself in an ATM for some amount of money you know you can cover in the next couple days. Now to the ATM and bank's way of thinking, you have that much money in the bank. As your second transaction ask for cash in about half or less of the amount of the check you deposited. If you have been with the bank for any length of time the ATM will give you the money. In other words, a good thing about ATMs is they do not argue with you the way a human teller would do. It is the same old routine we used years ago of running to the grocery store to cash a small check on Wednesday night against funds we would not have available until we got our payroll check on Friday and then running to the bank on Friday to get the money in our account before the other check we floated got there. It is just that the ATM gives you less arguments about it and no dirty looks. The ATM has no way of knowing if whatever you stuck in the deposit slot was any good or not although the human being who cleans it out the day certainly will, so it is a good -- excellent -- idea to give it an actual check -- even if one of your own made payable to yourself -- and be certain that there will be in fact 'real money' from somewhere in your account by the time wherever you 'made your deposit' gets around to sending it to your own bank a few days later. This works best if you do it on Saturday and no one is even going to look inside the machine for a couple days, let alone process anything. If you do not have money to cover your 'deposit' then expect that ATM card to go on a hot list and get eaten by the next ATM where you try to use it with a 'consult your bank for details' message on the screen. It is *bank fraud*, and I must recommend against it, but it works since no ATM machine will ever be as sophisticated as a bank teller with lots of experience or for that matter a courtesy counter clerk at the grocery store who tries to verify your balance before cashing a check for you. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 21:15:52 -0400 From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: cats8@erols.com Organization: Evergreen Software Subject: Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers Robert J. Niland wrote: > If the spammer uses a TenFreeHour account, sends the spam, and closes > the account before the ten free hours is up Isn't anyone seeing the latest AOL diskette packs? They are now offering FIFTY free hours instead of just ten! Paul Robinson (Formerly PAUL@TDR.COM) ------------------------------ From: cnordin@vni.net (Craig Nordin) Subject: Re: Users Charged For Number of HITS on Their Web Pages? Date: 12 Nov 1996 15:24:44 -0500 Organization: Virtual Networks There is every scheme of charging out there and all of them are better for some people. If you really know what you want, you most likely won't be disappointed. If you offer absolutely unlimited hits/bandwidth, someone is going to come by and take it from you. I can fill up a T1 or a T3 with cheescake pictures in a matter of a few days. If you are just starting out, you may not mind that your web pages are harder to reach than most. You can go to the free web publishing services for this. You may also want service with your web publishing capability. If you want a real person to talk to about your web pages, this is going to cost you more. The Rahul Dhesi method of metering looks like it is meant to discourage extreme use, not bilk a customer. Rahul Dhesi writes: > Now you do. From our new rate schedule: > Monthly charge for exceeding scaled hits: > $5 per 50,000 excess scaled hits/day in units of $5. > Monthly charge for exceeding megabyte volume: > $50 per 50 excess megabytes/day in units of $50. And, if you are conducting business on the Internet, you may find that it is more than worth it to take extra precautions as to availability of bandwidth. If you are paying by the hit, then you have more that you can demand, and logically there is something that the provider can do to get you more bandwidth. What people are paying for the design and building of a good web-brochure or support-center these days, they might as well pay a few dollars more to get access to a T1 or T3 that is not overloaded right from the start. It doesn't mean that every browser sees it quick, just that the web server isn't holding things up. Virtual Networks Premier Internet Services cnordin@vnii.net Indianapolis Indianapolis Indianapolis Metro http://www.vnii.net/ Indiana Indiana Indiana Washington DC Washington DC Washington DC Metro http://www.vni.net/ Virtual Networks Incorporated Virtual Networks of Indiana, Incorporated Jobs - Graphic Arts - Commercial Production -> http://studio.vni.net/jobs/ ------------------------------ From: dr@ripco.com (David Richards) Subject: New E-Mail SPAM Provider Organization: Ripco Internet BBS Chicago Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 01:27:40 GMT Here's the latest offering from a mail-spam hosting firm. The headers were via Interramp but the reply addresses are all forged. Note the Cleveland maildrop and request to _fax_ them a check. From outmail.com!FullDatabase Mon Nov 11 19:06:59 1996 Return-Path: Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Cyber-Times" To: FullDatabase@outmail.com Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 07:00:58 +0000 Reply-to: ReplyBy@MailPhoneFax.com Priority: urgent X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.33) ********** Cyber-Times E-mail Services ************* Are you looking for a way to send E-mail WITHOUT losing your account. Well, look no further! Some ( IP's ) Internet Providers tend to frown on people sending Bulk Mail from there servers or simply don't allow it, but we actually we actually encourage it. Because we know this is where the future is, where else can you reach over 65 Million people to market your product service or business to at such a low cost? Why run a full page ad in a magazine for $3,500 to $10,000 to only reach 100,000 to 500,000 people and then have a 3 month turn around before you even see any money, when you can reach over 65 MILLION people for a fraction of the cost and start getting orders in your mailbox in 3 to 5 days from your First Mailing? As we all know sales is a numbers game, and as you can see there's nothing that even comes close to this media of marketing. Everyday 10,080 new people log on-line that's 10,080 new prospects everyday! We'll put it to you like this lets say your selling a product for $39.95 and you E-mail 1,000,000 people with your marketing letter and you only get a 1% response rate that's 10,000 ORDERS, you can do the math on this one!! Here's what our service provides? Our service allows you to send mass e-mail to your list for all your marketing efforts! All you need is an existing email account on any online service or internet provider. There will be NO TRACE to your existing e-mail address. You will only use your existing e-mail address, "Pegasus" e-mail software (which we provide for FREE) and your own mailing list. Your broadcasted message will come from Cyber Times' servers, it will send through Cyber-Times servers, and everybody will respond back to Cyber-Times servers. There will be NO WORRIES ANYMORE about sending out mass e-mail! With our service, you can mass e-mail till your heart's content! All of you responses will be redirected right back to your existing E-mail without anybody else knowing your personal E-mail address. The only way they will know your E-mail address is when you reply back to them, we do this to protect our clients privacy. Here's what you receive ... 1) A virtual email address from our server for your positive replies. 2) Forwarding of your positive inquires of your offer from your virtual e-mail address to your existing e-mail. In other words, if someone e-mails to your virtual address, the message will immediately be forwarded to your "real" E-mail address. 3) Permission to send e-mail to ANY address! (including AOL,Prodigy, etc, This will really allow you to jump-start your sales!) 4) $25.00 for every person you refer to our services. 5) A **FREE** Autoresponder to the FIRST 20 people who enroll. (Please note: You are responsible for collecting or purchasing your own e-mail addresses.) We do offer e-mail addresses for sale! _______________________________________________________ So, what is this going to cost me? ----- $149 ONE-TIME setup fee, prepaid. ----- $99 a month for e-mailing up to 1 Million addresses ----- $199 a month for unlimited e-mailing!! $.0001 per email sent ($10/100k) rounded up to the nearest $10 billed on the 1st of the month following the previous month's usage. ----- $59.00 per year for an Autoresponder, this allows you to auto- matcally have people get your full marketing letter immediately 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week. You don't have to answer your inquiries manually! (Please note: to purchase an Autoresponder, you MUST use our mass e-mailing services!) At this LOW price for the Autoresponder, there will be a $10.00 fee for any changes to your Autoresponder after the account has been set up. NO HIDDEN FEE'S You may cancel your account at any time by contacting Cyber-Times in writing. ______________________________________________ So, if you are interested in our services. Print out the following form and follow the instructions... If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call us at: (216) 808-1347 _________________________________________ EZ ORDER FORM: Simply fill in the blanks... _____ Yes! I'm interested in your E-mail Services. I would like to send out my own bulk e-mail without aggravation and NO TOS violations! COMPANY NAME _________________________________________ (If Applicable) YOUR NAME _________________________________________ YOUR POSITION _________________________________________ STREET ADDRESS _________________________________________ CITY, STATE, ZIP_________________________________________ PHONE NUMBER(S) _________________________________________ FAX NUMBER _________________________________________ Please specify your virtual e-mail address call letters... First choice for your ID (2-5 letters)______________@cyber-times.org Second choice for your ID (2-5 letters)____________@cyber-times.org You must use an existing e-mail account on any online service or internet provider, Remember, there is no need for you to worry about losing that account, because it will not be included on any of your mass e-mail. Cyber-Timess will be the only people to know your true e-mail address. This email address can be changed at any time. Please indicate your existing e-mail address below: REAL E-mail address:__________________@______________________ We accept Checks by mail or fax, or Money Order by mail. (Please note: We will no longer be able to accept checks verbally by phone. Cyber-times MUST have a valid signature on file to process your order!) I authorize Cyber-Times to deposit my check for the amount indicated on this form one time only! I agree that if I want to continue this service My check/money order must be received by the 5th of the month to keep my account active. I may cancel my account at any time by contacting Cyber-Times in writing. SIGNATURE:x________________________ DATE:x__________________ **** WE MUST HAVE THIS SIGNATURE ON FILE WHETHER YOU FAX OR ***** MAIL TO CYBER-TIMES BEFORE WE CAN ACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT! PLEASE PASTE YOUR CHECK HERE (If you fax a check, there is no need for you to send the original check. We will draft up a new check, with the exact information from your original check. I authorize Cyber-Times to charge an additional $25 fee if my checks are returned for insufficient or uncollectable funds. Cyber-Times will not be held liable for any claims that I represent in my advertisements or Autoresponder text. SIGNATURE:x________________________ DATE:x__________________ Our 24 hr fax is: (216) 808-1507 If you fax a check, there is no need for you to send the original check. We will draft up a new check, with the exact information from your original check. If you feel more comfortable sending payment through the mail, please send all forms and check to: **Please Note: ALL checks have a 10 day business hold. To get your account setup immediately send Certified Check or Money Order to: Cyber-Times Mail Server 14837 Detroit Ave. Suite135 Cleveland, OH 44107 -------------------------- David Richards Ripco, since Nineteen-Eighty-Three My opinions are my own, Public Access in Chicago But they are available for rental Shell/SLIP/PPP/UUCP/ISDN/Leased dr@ripco.com (312) 665-0065 !Free Usenet/E-Mail! TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well about all I can suggest is that people lean very heavily on interramp.com for allowing this customer (Cyber-Times) to be on their site and that readers of this message do what they can with the fax machine at 216-808-1507 and the voice phone at 216-808-1347. A call in the late evening produced interesting results. My first call reached an answering machine (not voice mail) at the 'desk of Davidson' who was out and invited me to leave a message. I dialed in immediatly on a second line here and got a woman who answered 'hello'. When I asked if it was Cyber Times she said it was. When I called again a couple minutes later the first line was free (the answering machine had probably disconnected) and I got the machine again. The woman who answered did not sound as if she was terribly enthusiastic about about whatever her husband/boy friend/roommate Unintelligible Davidson is doing with this Cyber-Times nonsense. I think she is going to get tired of it pretty soon in fact. Readers around the Cleveland area may wish to have visitation at 14837 Detroit Avenue, Suite 135 and report back on their findings. I suspect Unintelligible is working out of his home and the Detroit Avenue address is just a mail drop. On the phone, it sounded to me as though I might have reached a residence. If you need to fax them anything the lady told me their fax line was working fine, and if you need to speak with them in person, it would appear when the listed number is busy it rolls over to a second line which is answered in person. Uh, you did want more details about the company didn't you? It might be worth 25-30 cents to call in the evening when phone rates are least expensive. Am I correct in assuming all the spam will be forwarded out of Cyber-Times via interramp.com? It may be just one more place to add to your mail filters, i.e. look for interramp.com in the envelope somewhere. His email forwarding service is sort of a clever idea though. Only one site will get the heat that way, and he has made it pretty plain he could care less, which is a shame, because if he were to get a customer who did another kiddie-porn blitz on all 55 million names on his list, paid him with a bogus check and then vanished he would start to care when a few hundred FBI agents kicked in his doors and ripped off all of his equipment, so little they know about anything. Kinda makes you want to play both sides at the same time, doesn't it, then sit back and watch the fun in the Battle of the Bozos. Remember, harassment by phone or fax is illegal. No hacking and no phreaking please! And no dirty tricks either! If someone is good at manipulating puppets on the end of strings it is possible we might all have a great laugh out of this sometime soon watching the FBI bashing the anonymous junk-emailer who never knew what hit him until it was too late. Wheeeeeee! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #610 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 13 11:41:14 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA21220; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 11:41:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 11:41:14 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611131641.LAA21220@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #611 TELECOM Digest Wed, 13 Nov 96 11:41:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 611 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CFP: ICA3PP-97: Dec 1997, Melbourne, Australia (Mehmet Orgun) Telcos Start Digital Phone Service/Sales Wednesday (Mike Pollock) Re: AT&T Digital Receives no Calls in Orlando; Can Call Out! (J. Rhodes) Florida's 904 Area Code to Split - AGAIN! (Mark J. Cuccia) First California Prefix Lottery (John Cropper) Re: NYNEX to Adopt Uniform Reach Numbers For Repair Service (Mark Schumann) Re: Help! Need Multi-Fax Receive Software (Gary Breuckman) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 13 Nov 1996 15:14:30 +1100 From: Mehmet Orgun Subject: CFP: ICA3PP-97: Dec 1997, Melbourne, Australia Reply-To: Mehmet ORGUN ----- Begin Included Message ----- Subject: CFP: ICA3PP-97: Dec 1997, Melbourne, Australia From: ICA3PP-97 Secretary Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 15:11:15 +1100 Sender: mick@deakin.edu.au Please find below the ICA3PP-97 Call for Papers, which will be held in Melbourne, Australia during early December 1997. Your help in distributing this information to others who may be interested would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Mick Hobbs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Michael J. Hobbs | School of Computing & Mathematics -------------------------------------+ Deakin University Local Organising Committee | Geelong, Victoria, 3217. AUSTRALIA | IEEE 3rd International Conference on | Phone: +61 52 272960 Algorithms and Architectures for | Fax: +61 52 272028 Parallel Processing | Email: ica3pp97@deakin.edu.au ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CALL FOR PAPERS ICA3PP-97 The IEEE Third International Conference on Algorithms And Architectures for Parallel Processing December 8th-12th, 1997, Melbourne Australia THEME: The IEEE Third International Conference on Algorithms And Architectures for Parallel Processing (ICA3PP-97) will be held in Melbourne, Australia, from December 8th to 12th, 1997. The purpose of this conference is to bring together developers and researchers from universities, industry and government to advance science and technology in distributed and parallel systems and processing. Contributions describing original research, surveys and applications including the following areas are solicited: Development and Debugging of Parallel and Distributed Programs Distributed and Parallel Applications Distributed and Parallel Languages Distributed Operating Systems Distributed Shared Memory Distributed Scheduling and Load Balancing High Speed Networks for Parallel Processing Massive Parallel Processing Instruction-Level Parallel Processing Parallel and Distributed Algorithms Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems Parallel Processing on Clusters of Workstations and Servers Parallelizing Compilers Performance of Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems Proposals for tutorial sessions are also solicited. Your proposals should include the lecture outline, assumed background of audience, and vitae of the presenter. Special sessions on current interest topics are also being planned. For further information on these minitracks please refer to the conference web page. CONFERENCE CHAIRPERSON A. Goscinski, Deakin U. PROGRAM COMMITTEE D. Abramson, Griffith U. A. Ananda, National U. of Singapore A. Barak, Hebrew U. of Jerusalem F. Berman, U. of California, San Diego A. Bode, Technical U. of Munich R. Brent, Australian National U. A. Broggi, Universita' di Parma S. Chanson, Hong Kong U. of Sci. and Tech. P. Cheung, The U. of Hong Kong J. Dongarra, U. of Tennessee J. Edwards, U. of Technology, Sydney B. Garner, Deakin U. S. Hariri, Syracuse U. G. Hellestrand, U. of New South Wales K. Hwang, The U. of Hong Kong J. Indulska, Queensland U. R. Iyer, U. of Illinois, Urb.-Champ. Z. Kedem, New York U. T. Kikuno, Osaka U. D. Kiong, National U. of Singapore C. Kintala, Bell Laboratories H. Kobayashi, Princeton U. R. Kotagiri, Melbourne U. J. Liu, U. of Illinois, Urb.-Champ. J. Magee, Imperial College London L. Narasimhan, DSTO Aust. L. Patnaik, Indian Institute of Science C. Polychronopoulos, U. of Illinois Urb.-Champ. P. Prichard, Griffith U. V. Piuri, Politecnico di Milano T. Radhakrishnan, Concordia U. M. Raynal, IRISA France N. Scarabottolo, U. degli Studi di Modena G. Sechi, National U. of Italy B. Shirazi, U. of Texas Arlington M. Singhal, Ohio State U. J. Song, National U. of Singapore S. Srinivas, Dalhousie U. B. Szymanski, Rensselear U. C. Szyperski, Queensland U. of Tech. P. Tang, U. of Southern Queensland S. Turner, U. of Exeter J. Walpole, OGI of Sci. and Tech. K. Watanabe, Shizuoka U. M. Zhou, U. of Elec. Sci. and Tech. of China W. Zhou, Deakin U. W. Zwaenepoel, Rice U. LOCAL ORGANISING COMMITTEE D. De Paoli, Deakin U. R. Dew, Deakin U. J. Guenther, Deakin U. M. Hobbs, Deakin U. P. Horan, Deakin U. P. Joyce, Deakin U. J. Silcock, Deakin U. Y. Yang, Deakin U. W. Zhou, Deakin U. PAPER SUBMISSION: Prospective authors should submit six copies of their full paper to the Conference Secretary. Papers should not exceed 20 pages in length (double spaced, A4 or letter format, 12 point type) including an abstract, all text, figures, tables and references. The authors' names, affiliation, email address, telephone and fax numbers should be on the cover page. ICA3PP97 Secretary School of Computing and Mathematics Deakin University Geelong, Victoria 3217, Australia Tel.: +61 52 272647, Fax: +61 52 272454 Email: ica3pp97@deakin.edu.au WWW: http://www.cm.deakin.edu.au/ica3pp97 Papers will be reviewed internationally and authors will be advised as per the dates given below. Please refer to the Web Page for further information. SCHEDULE: Papers due on: 17th March 1997 Tutorial Proposals due on: 17th March 1997 Notification of Acceptance: 18th July 1997 Camera-ready papers due on: 1st September 1997 Registration due on: 15th October 1997 SPONSORS: IEEE Victoria Section, IEEE Computer Society. Deakin University, Faculty of Science and Technology Deakin University. -------------------- Yes, I am interested in ICA3PP 97. Name (including title): Affiliation: Address: Phone: Fax: Email: [ ] I would like to receive further information about ICA3PP 97. Please put me on your mailing list. [ ] I intend to submit a full paper to ICA3PP 97. - Provisional title: - Provisional list of authors: - Presented by: Please indicate and return to Email: ica3pp97@deakin.edu.au ----------------------------- or to ICA3PP97 Secretary School of Computing and Mathematics Deakin University Geelong, Victoria 3217, Australia Tel.: +61 52 272647, Fax: +61 52 272454 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 21:14:47 -0800 From: Mike Pollock Organization: SJS Entertainment Subject: Telcos Start Digital Phone Service and Sales Wednesday High Quality Mobile Phone Eyed By HILLARY CHURA AP Business Writer CHICAGO (AP) -- The next generation of mobile telephones promises to bring consumers higher-quality calls, fancier technology and cheaper prices, a consortium of regional phone companies said Tuesday. The new phones use digital technology, which has been around for years but is just getting to the point where millions of callers can use it. PrimeCo Personal Communications said its $199 telephone -- slightly bigger than a large candy bar -- will allow consumers to make clear-sounding calls, receive pages and know who is calling before they pick up. The service will be available in 15 cities starting Wednesday. PrimeCo's advanced digital-wireless system is one of several digital technologies that use signals in which everything, including voices, is converted into the digital language of computers, making greater use of scarce airwave space. The technology, called code division multiple access, has been available since World War II when the U.S. military used it for top secret communications. In addition to Caller ID and allowing callers to check how much they've rung up, the technology alerts PrimeCo customers when their bills reach a certain amount. "We really think we are setting a new standard in terms of quality. When people use our phones for the first time, we can see the surprise," said Ben Scott, PrimeCo's president and chief executive officer, at the unveiling Tuesday in New York. Don't be surprised to hear other companies make similarly enthusiastic claims soon. Omnipoint Corp. soon will enter the New York market with a digital system, and a venture led by Sprint Corp. is expected to announce a multicity launch by the end of the year. Other companies, such as Pacific Bell Mobile Services, Ameritech and AT&T also are launching digital systems. Only a fraction of today's mobile telephones use digital technology, but industry experts expect the number to grow slowly by the end of the century. Predictions, however, are that cellular usage still will outstrip digital usage by about 2 to 1, said analyst Phillip Redman at the Boston-based Yankee Group. He said predicted wireless sales would increase as new consumers are enticed by cheaper, better digital technology that offers more privacy. Digital technology has a built-in encryption for more secure calls. One complaint about cellular technology has been the ease with which people can eavesdrop or tap into other accounts to charge calls to another number. Digital technology isn't problem-free, though. Critics say the devices may interfere with hearing aids, pacemakers and other medical devices. In addition, PrimeCo's telephones may not work from higher floors in buildings. Baby Bells Nynex, Bell Atlantic and U.S. West teamed up with AirTouch, a California cellular telephone company, to form PrimeCo. The phones will be sold Wednesday in the following cities: Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Ft. Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Fla.; New Orleans; Richmond and Norfolk, Va.; Chicago; Milwaukee; Dallas; Ft. Worth, San Antonio, Houston and Honolulu. Austin should be added within a few weeks, the company said. ------------------------------ From: Jeffrey Rhodes Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Receives no Calls in Orlando But Can Call Out! Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 11:05:53 -0800 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services PStreicher@aol.com wrote: > Jeffrey, > I don't think my calls were 'cloned' as I have since received a > detailed billing statement and there were no calls showing thosed days > except the outgoing calls that I made. That is not a good assumption. Maybe all the cloner wanted was the ability to receive incoming calls. Maybe any outgoing calls haven't been billed yet (roamer clearinghouse overhead delay of up to 30 days). > Would that be a good indication that I was not 'cloned'? Or, while > being cloned does it inhibit your receiving calls and then the cloner > can make calls at any time later with your nam data? The cloner's registration on another switch or paging area will "steal" your current registration and hence "steal" your incoming calls. You both fight for registration by making outgoing calls and reregistering every 15-20 minutes with your current system. > Also, can a digital phone be used for PCS? Or, does one have to > purchase a new 'PCS' type phone? Some digital (and some analog) cellphones are prepared for IS-41 Rev C Authentication and hence will be unclonable. You may need to bring your current digital cellphone in for service to get this feature. If you want 50 cent flat rate roaming, you need to buy a new Digital PCS cellphone. This is the first cellphone that supports a Digital Control Channel (IS-136). All other control channels for digital cellphones are Analog Control Channel (IS-54). N-AMPS is purely analog control channel and analog voice channels, the only digital characteristic is the ability to show alphanumeric canned short messages, but N-AMPS does support Authentication, so this, too, might be considered a "PCS" feature. > You say the same thing happened to you, did you get billed for calls > you did not make? Not yet, but I checked with our Fraud Department and they told me that is not a sufficient indication that you have not been cloned. Maybe your cloner is sitting back waiting for you to take a vacation to Europe and leave your US cellphone off for a couple of weeks. That's when you'll get the bill. Use 'Fraud Prevention Feature" to frustrate your cloner or at least request it temporarally if you intend to be inactive on the air interface for a while. Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 10:43:56 GMT From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Florida's 904 Area Code to Split - AGAIN! I've heard that there was a public hearing in Tallahassee FL for yet another new NPA in Florida. This will be the second split of 904. Last year, BellSouth and Bellcore had announced that 904 would split, with the new NPA code to be 850, to take effect in permissive dialing in December 1995. However, a few months prior to the split going into permissive dialing, Bellcore and BellSouth changed the new NPA code from 850 to 352. The reason was that the digits 850 were in use as an NXX central office code in the 407 area code and that location would have been in a (permissive) local seven-digit dialing/calling area of some exchanges actually in the 904 area -- and those exchanges in 904 would have been splitting to 850. Thus there was this 'code/dialing conflict'. Also, note that 352 spells out FLA on the letters on the dial. This time, the proposed plans still indicate to use 850 for the new area code, but the eastern/southern region of 904 (including Jacksonville FL) would keep 904, while points west would change to 850 (Tallahassee, Panama City, Pensacola, etc). However, as has been happening with all of these new NPA codes, local and state politics have again come into play. The problem with changing the western portion of 904 to the new code would mean that Tallahassee would have to change their area code. Tallahassee is the state capital. The main state offices seem to be disturbed that changing their area code, including stationery, letterheads, promotional media, advertising, etc. would be too much of a cost to the Florida taxpayers. More details as I get them. This will be the *ninth* area code for Florida! Since 'interchangeable' (NNX format) area codes started to take effect two years ago in 1995, Florida *doubled* their number of NPA codes from four to eight - and each one of the earlier four codes was split! Also NPA code 407 split from 305 only in Spring of 1988, less than ten years ago! Florida was only *one* area code in 1947 when the area code format began, 305. At the time of the original assignments, and for a few years thereafter, all states/provinces with *one* area code were assigned N0X format codes, while all states/provinces with *multiple* area codes were assigned N1X format codes. That was abandoned in 1953 when some of the original N0X states needed to be split! Florida was one of those early N0X states which needed a split. In 1953, the 813 NPA was carved out, and covered Florida's southwestern Gulf Coast area (independent telco territory), but according to NPA Code maps of US/Canada from the 1950's, 813 seemed to extend *noticeably* farther north of the Tampa Bay area than it did in maps from the 1960's and later. Area Code maps beginning around 1960 shows 813 covering from 'just' the Tampa Bay area and southward. It was the only area code in the continental US which was *exclusively* non-Bell. GTE and (Sprint's) United Telco are the only two LEC's (telcos) which have been in the 813 NPA. In Summer 1965, Florida's third area code (904) was carved out of 305. The new 904 NPA covered the Florida panhandle area (northern Florida along the Gulf Coast), all the way east to Jacksonville on the Atlantic Ocean, as well as a few points south of Jacksonville. This remained relatively stable (as did the NANP itself) until the 1980's when there were some additional new area code assignments. Three area codes in the US were split in the first half of 1988, and Florida's 305 split off the state's fourth NPA (407), covering areas north of the Ft.Lauderdale area. Again, things still seemed to be stable until 1995 when NNX format area codes became effective. The 'independent' telcos' 813 area code split off 941 for points south (including Ft.Myers) in May 1995. 305 split off 954 in a small sliver including Ft.Lauderdale, just north of Miami, September 1995 (it was originally going to be an overlay, but there was just too much opposition from the politicians, media, public, competition, etc). In December 1995, 904 first split off 352, covering the Gainesville area, which was also a revamping of the original 850 split. Finally, 561 split off from 407 in May of 1996, covereing a sliver in the southern part of the old 407, which includes West Palm Beach. It has been said that 407 is again in a 'jeopardy' situation. And now, 904 might split again, in a different area, but using the 850 code which was supposed to be the first-choice code in its first split, last year. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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: psyber@mindspring.com Subject: First California Prefix Lottery Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 23:37:03 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 5301 San Francisco, CA 94102 CONTACT: Dianne Dienstein November 6, 1996 CPUC - 85 415-703-2423 FIRST PHONE PREFIX LOTTERY FOR CALIFORNIA In probably the largest phone number prefix lottery in the nation, California's first lottery, held on October 23, issued prefixes to 13 companies for 310, 415, and 619 area codes. Nine companies are on a prioritized waiting list and will receive one prefix prior to the next lottery. The 310, 415 and 619 area codes are rapidly running out of phone numbers. Until new area codes can be assigned to the areas now served by them, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has ordered prefixes rationed through periodic lotteries. At the October 23 lottery, the CPUC Telecommunications Division in conjunction with the California Code Administrator allotted 60 percent of the prefixes to companies requesting them for the first time, and 40 percent to companies already serving the areas. O 310 area code - three first time companies applied for 16 prefixes, and four companies already serving that area code applied for seven. Six prefixes were drawn in the lottery. O 415 area code - four first time companies applied for 10 prefixes, and five existing companies applied for 12. Six prefixes were drawn in the lottery. O 619 area code - two first time companies applied for 8 prefixes, and nine existing companies applied for 22. Four prefixes were drawn in the lottery. New area code 562 for the 310 area, new area code 760 for the 619 area, and new area code 650 for the 415 area will open next year. A prefix lottery will be held on the third Tuesday of each month until the new area codes are fully implemented. Prefixes in the 562 area code will be drawn at the next lottery on November 19, and those in the 760 area code will be drawn in January. John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 fax: 609.637.9430 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: catfood@apk.net (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Re: NYNEX to Adopt Uniform Reach Numbers For Repair Service Date: 12 Nov 1996 17:00:05 -0500 Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access Uni* Site In article , Dave Perrussel wrote: > nilsphone@aol.com (Nilsphone) wrote: >> One thing which is _very_ wrong with 611-numbers is that you have to >> be right there to make the call. For example, if my wife has a telco >> problem, she calls me about it, since I am more telco-adept than she >> is. Then I call the telco. I might be in another service area/state/ >> country. How do I dial GTE Southern California 611 from Singapore? > Many places that have 611 for the number for repair service also have > a seven-digit number (local to those in that particular telco) or an > 1-800 or 1-888 number for those outside the telco. Then again you have NYNEX. Their 800 number for repair service is accessible from the whole US, but it prompts you to key in a number at which their service rep will call you back. Naturally it will not accept an area code outside of NYNEX's own "service" area. Sigh. I still cannot believe just how horrible NYNEX really is. Mark W. Schumann | catfood@apk.net | http://junior.apk.net/~catfood | Mike White: the Ralph Perk of the 90s! Draft | Pat O'Malley in '97! ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Help! Need Multi-Fax Receive Software Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 03:13:10 GMT In article , Robert A. Book wrote: > Am I missing something here? It should be legal, by the way, to install > multiple copies of the same software on the same machine without buying > extra copies. Of course, if you need 16 faxmodems, you might need two > machines, so you'd need to buy two copies, but not 16. Yes, you are missing something. Most windows programs have a problem when you run more than one copy of them. Usually they have an "ini" file that's in a specific place (ie., \windows) that tells the program where to find the other parts of the program, the directory to use for files, etc. Or perhaps they always create work files in the same place, like \windows\temp, regardless of the directory they are installed in. Running more than one copy of the program will result in both copies trying to use the same files, logs, etc. Now if the program can be installed independently in two different directories, will run with separate files, and are't bothered because they don't have exclusive use of the computer while receiving faxes, you might do all right. puma@netcom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #611 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 13 12:28:00 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA25735; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 12:28:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 12:28:00 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611131728.MAA25735@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #612 TELECOM Digest Wed, 13 Nov 96 12:28:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 612 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Teleconsumer Hotline Website (markr@idi.net) Re: America Online's Preferredmail Combats Junk E-Mail (Ronda Hauben) Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming (James E. Bellaire) Re: Ameritech Questions (Steven R. Kleinedler) Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs (Joe Jensen) Mobile Phone Mayhem! (RISKS Digest via Monty Solomon) Brokerages Fined for Dialing No Call Lists (Tad Cook) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Lars Poulsen) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 13 Nov 1996 11:13:00 -0800 From: markr Reply-To: markr@idi.net Organization: Issue Dynamics Inc. Subject: Teleconsumer Hotline Website For More Information Contact: David Baquis, Assistant Director 202/347-7208 tch@teleconsumer.org http://www.teleconsumer.org Consumer Hotline Announces Internet Site for Telecommunications Information Washington, DC, November 1, 1996 -- Information to help consumers better understand the broad new array of communications products and services is now available on the Internet from the Tele-Consumer Hotline, the nations leading source for impartial information on this topic. The Hotline's English and Spanish publications, as well as a function which allows consumers to pose questions or complaints to industry experts or the Hotline's bilingual counselors, can be found at http://www.teleconsumer.org/hotline. The site features an extensive glossary of telecommunications terms and consumer-friendly information and advice on a variety of topics such as: selecting a long distance company; unauthorized switching of long distance companies (known as 'slamming'); and using calling cards. For people with disabilities, the Hotline provides information on topics such as relay services, assistive technologies, equipment distribution programs and special discounts. All of the publications offered on the Hotlines new homepage are also available at no charge to consumers who send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to: Tele-Consumer Hotline -- P.O. Box 27207, Washington, DC 20005. The Hotline is an independent and impartial education service that has been serving residential consumers since 1984. Its original mission was to assist consumers in the process of selecting a long distance carrier amid the confusion caused by the breakup of AT&T. In the past twelve years, the Hotline has broadened its scope to cover a wide range of communications related issues, assisting more than half a million individual consumers. The Hotline was jointly founded by the Consumer Federation of America (CFA), the nations largest consumer advocacy organization, and the Telecommunications Research and Action Center (TRAC), the oldest and largest public interest communications group. In addition to CFA and TRAC, the Hotline's nonprofit board of directors includes representatives from the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), Consumer Action (CA) and the Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (VCCC). Financial and technical support from AT&T, Bell Atlantic, MCI, NYNEX, Pacific Bell, SBC and Sprint enable the Hotline to provide its services and publications to residential consumers without charge. ------------------------------ From: rh120@columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben) Subject: Re: America Online's Preferredmail Combats Junk E-Mail Date: 13 Nov 1996 15:07:19 GMT Organization: Columbia University noone@llondel.demon.co.uk wrote: > In article it was written: >> Mike Pollock wrote: >>> DULLES, Va., Oct. 24 /PRNewswire/ -- AMERICA ONLINE today introduced >>> PreferredMail, a new tool that allows members to avoid unwanted junk >>> e-mail, a major source of complaints from online users. >> When does AOL finally do something about junk mail sent by their >> customers (it's totally misleading to speak of "members") to people >> outside of AOL?! I often receive such unwanted advertizing stuff sent >> from an AOL address (some even in German!). > Perhaps the answer is for AOL to change the terms of their '10 hours > free' accounts to either prohibit email outside of AOL on such an > account or to restrict such accounts to a maximum of 25 or 100 emails. > Those wanting more can pay for a full account. It would seem that if AOL is serious about doing something about junk email it would have an AUP (acceptible use policy) for all who use its accounts and would end any account where junk is email is sent out from. That would mean having a place one could report abuse to and acting on the reports. Also, some of the freenets have a way that people can come in as a guest, but they can't send email or post to Usenet. If AOL wants to offer free accounts with no rules attached, those accounts can be to look at their AOL offerings or at Usenet, etc but not to be able to post or send email. There are those who have pioneered responsible ways to make Net access available. Aol has many it can learn from if it wants to be responsible toward the use of Usenet and the Internet. It seems, however, that it basically doesn't care and if that is the case, people on Usenet and the Internet have to figure out how to deal with those online providers who are encouraging and in fact promoting abuse of Usenet and the Internet. Ronda rh120@columbia.edu Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Ronda, they do have a Terms of Service policy at AOL, and you can write to them at 'abuse@aol.com' when you are aggrieved by something one of their members has done. Whether or not it does any good to write, and how effective they are in policing their own members is the question. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 96 10:11 EST From: James E Bellaire Subject: Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming In TD609 Mike Pollock bravely wrote: > I don't know if anyone else in the Digest got this, but I'm willing to > be a *gulp* guinea pig. > <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> > From: starmaker@earthstar.com > Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 18:48:31 -0800 > To: pheel@sprynet.com > Subject: May I Please Have Your Permission ?? > You're probably losing a lot of money on your telephone bill (just > like I was) and I was wondering if I could e-mail you some free > information that could save you hundreds of dollars every year. > [SNIP] > I am against SPAM, and am therefore asking you to e-mail me your > permission before I send you anything. > ________________________________________ > IF YOU DO NOT REPLY TO THIS REQUEST, > I WILL NOT CONTACT YOU, AGAIN. I received the same 'invitation' at both of my email addresses. About the only thing nice I can say is at least he put my name on the 'To:' line. (Not the usual BCC: method.) And that the headers were a simple pass between his machine and my MX host. > Received: from servo.earthstar.com by iquest.net with smtp Still qualifies as spam though. (Identical unsolicited message to multiple recipiants.) BTW: A.J. - The "You're probably losing a lot of money on your telephone bill" statement is demeaning for regulars in TELECOM Digest. You're not going to get my business by insuling me in your spam ... James E. Bellaire bellaire@tk.com Webpage Available 23.5 Hrs a Day!!! http://www.iquest.net/~bellaire/ ------------------------------ From: srkleine@midway.uchicago.edu (steven r kleinedler) Subject: Re: Ameritech Questions Organization: The University of Chicago Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 15:15:57 GMT In article , wrote: > steven r kleinedler wrote: >> 1. On their web page, on the page that shows the map of 773/312, why >> can't they have a real map showing real boundaries? All there is is a >> not-to-scale drawing of Chicago with a fuzzy clump centered on the >> Loop. Well, DUH. Is there no existing actual map showing actual >> boundaries available anywhere? (If anyone does know of such, please >> post the URL.) > The scale adjustment necessary is so radically different that any > attempt on a broad-scale (~200 mi2) map will overstate the actual 312 > area. No -- we don't need to see the whole 312 area -- we know that the city line is the boundary on the outer edge. I just want to see a map of the jagged line that runs roughly along North, Western, and 35th (Lake Michigan's the fourth boundary). The boundary is really erratic in places, and I thought if *anyone* had a map of it, it'd be Ameritech. >> 2. A theatre company I'm a part of is in 773. We have voice mail. >> When I access our voice mail from another phone, and I have to punch # >> and the 10-digit number. 773-404-XXXX does not get me to our voice >> mail; I still have to use 312-404-XXXX. When does Ameritech switch >> over its voice mail box system to accurately reflect the area code? > Have you placed a trouble ticket with Ameritech yet? It was pointed out to me that we're still in the permissible dialing period and that it will be taken care of by the time it's mandatory. This message has been brought to you by Steve Kleinedler. ------------------------------ From: Joe Jensen Subject: Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 08:11:15 -0500 Craig Nordin wrote: > I would love to find out what the Bell-owned ISPs say about this ISP > vs. Bell issue (ISPs said to cause telco gridlock). I would venture to say that the technical folks dealing with the traffic issues relative to ISP access have never talked to the Bell-owned ISPs. For example, in one Bell company I am familiar with, the engineering function isn't in the same state as the internet service provider entity. The long hold time associated with Internet access is a REAL problem. To understand why, you need to understand that the switch is engineered to support specified concentration ratio across the central office, typically somewhere between 4:1 to 8:1. The problem occurs because at the lowest level of the switch where the concentration occurs, the ratio could be 128 customers to 16 switch ports. An example could find the ISP with 8 of the 128 lines in this concentration group. If those lines are continually busy, that would leave only 8 switch ports for the other 120 customers. That turns out to a concentration ratio of 15:1. The other customers can start seeing delays in receiving dialtone or no dialtone at all. To counteract this, the telco must reengineer the switch at the lowest level and spread the "offending" ISP lines across more concentration groups. To offer the same level of service the telco must "deload" the concentration groups so the equipment that had originally support 512 customers may now only support 480 or less. The engineering also costs time and money. What is the long range solution? Get the internet traffic off the voice switch. Both ADSL and cable modems provide a reasonable solution to this problem. The telcos are in a bind. Do they spend the time and money to reengineer the switch only to have the traffic pulled off when new the new technology arrives? I am glad I don't have to answer that question, but as a cableco anticipating offering internet access over cable modems next year, I am certainly willing to help. Joe Jensen Buckeye Cablevision Toledo, Ohio ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 03:13:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mobile Phone Mayhem! Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 18.60 Date: Thu, 7 Nov 96 17:18:26 -0000 From: "Trevor Warwick INF-SP" Subject: Mobile Phone Mayhem! Another twist on the well known "Cleaner buffs computer room floor and takes down entire site" stories: We recently had some engineers from AT&T in our computer room for three days, working on a PABX which also lives in there. During this period, two of our main Netware servers have been extremely unreliable, crashing several times a day. The AT&T engineers were working near these servers, and we initially thought that they might have been causing the crashes by disturbing some cables. After a few of these unexplained crashes, one of our MIS group noticed that every time he went in to the server room to reboot the dead servers, one of the AT&T engineers was using his mobile phone. So, they were asked to turn their phones off while working in the server room, and the problem has not reoccurred. To test the theory a bit further, the MIS group then took an otherwise unused server, and experimented with using a mobile phone near it. With the working phone being used less than a foot away from the machine, they provoked a crash which corrupted the system disk (and its mirror volume) beyond repair. Trevor Warwick, Madge Networks, Sefton Park, Bells Hill, Slough, England +44 (0)1753 661401 twarwick@madge.com fax : +44 (0)1753 661011 ------------------------------ Subject: Brokerages Fined for Dialing No Call Lists Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 23:35:42 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Brokerages Pay Fine for Dialing Florida 'No Call' Listings By Helen Huntley, St. Petersburg Times, Fla. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Nov. 11--Four big brokerage firms landed in hot water with the state for making cold calls to Floridians on the "no sales solicitation calls" list. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., Paine Webber Inc. and Smith Barney Inc. agreed to pay a combined $33,000 fine and to improve marketing procedures under a settlement announced Thursday with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Florida law prohibits businesses from making unsolicited calls to the 40,000 people who are on the state's "no call" list. Companies that use telemarketing are supposed to purchase the list and check it before placing calls. Agriculture Commissioner Bob Crawford said the brokerage firms ran into trouble partly because of recent changes in Florida area codes. He said the companies apologized for their mistakes. Crawford said the department is investigating cases in several other industries. He said people on the list should report any unsolicited calls to the department. Residential numbers can be placed on the list for a $10 enrollment fee and a $5 annual renewal fee. For information call (800) 435-7352. ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 12 Nov 1996 23:47:38 -0800 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications The article which Tad Cook submitted is a typical piece of junk science reporting. The article provides no evidence that the science wasn't also junk. Lori Hawkins says: > The five-year study used computer models to simulate the Internet, a > global network of computers where at any moment tens of thousands of > users may be trying to get through to popular sites. > Pricing, the study showed, would keep users who don't have immediate > needs off-line during peak times. Now, using the Internet costs the > same whether it's 3 a.m. or 3 p.m. If indeed the study was performed exclusively using computer models, the elastic property of the demand (i.e. higher price, less demand) was probably built into the model; thus it can hardly be seen as a result of the simulation. > "If you want to get on the Web during a busy time, you should pay more > for it," says Andrew Whinston, a UT business professor who headed the > study along with Dale Stahl, a UT economics professor. What users "should" pay is a personal opinion, not a scientific result from a traffic engineering study. > Pricing, the study showed, would keep users who don't have immediate > needs off-line during peak times. Now, using the Internet costs the > same whether it's 3 a.m. or 3 p.m. Certainly, there is a price that would keep most users off the net; if you set the price that high, there is no congestion. But what good is it for you that there is no congestion, if you cannot afford to connect? I am reminded of the old saying: "For every problem, there is an obvious, simple solution ... which is usually wrong." What is happening at this time, is that the telephone companies are trying to take over the retail side of the Internet, and turn it into a pay-as-you-go a-penny-a-minute money machine. This will of course mean the end of the Internet as we know it. To this political end, lots of stories are produced to tell the public that the Internet is overcrowded, and will only become usable after we all get to pay a lot more money. The reality is that some parts of the net are congested, other parts have plenty of bandwidth. Those service providers that offer the least expensive service, tend to have the most congestion. So what else is new ? Lots of people complain about being unable to dial in. Well, if you get a busy tone at 9PM, that is not the fault of the Internet ... that is because your local Internet service provider has sold more accounts than he has modems for. Here in Santa Barbara, we have about 5 local ISPs (Internet Service Providers), that I know of (RAIN.ORG, West.NET, Silcom.COM, Impulse.NET, SBCEO.K12.CA.US) plus local dialups for the national providers (AOL, Compuserve, SprintLink, UUNET). The people who use the least expensive providers have always been complaining that they have trouble getting in during "prime time"; I pay two dollars more per month, and I don't think I have EVER gotten a busy signal when I dialed in. Many providers also have insufficient capacity from the local office towards the backbone. The better services have bitten the bullet and upgraded from a single T-1 to a fractional T-3 service. Those who haven't will have users that complain. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that from my location > here, things have become horrible. Having a 28.8 modem on the line means > absolutely nothing. I might as well go back to having a 300 baud modem. In order to evaluate such a statement, one would need to know what the path that you are evaluating looks like. I presume that most of your online time is spent in a telnet session to MASSIS.LCS.MIT.EDU; do you know what the path from your terminal to MIT looks like ? Seen from the router that connects my workplace to our ISP, the path to MIT looks like this (using the TRACEROUTE tool): 1: 131.143.4.10 portal.lobby.rns.com. (41 ms) (33 ms) (31 ms) 2: 199.201.128.252 sbc-cmc-gw.silcom.com. (231 ms) (179 ms) (114 ms) 3: 199.201.128.254 sbc-mci-gw.silcom.com. (169 ms) (128 ms) (49 ms) 4: 204.70.49.25 .....Bloomington.mci.net. (121 ms) (225 ms) (358 ms) 5: 204.70.3.129 core1-fddi-1.Bloomington.mci.net. (158 ms) (77 ms) (86 ms) 6: 204.70.1.45 core-hssi-2.Boston.mci.net. (132 ms) (161 ms) (131 ms) 7: 204.70.1.45 core-hssi-2.Boston.mci.net. (236 ms) (340 ms) *** 8: 204.70.2.34 border1-fddi-0.Boston.mci.net. (134 ms) (151 ms) (122 ms) 9: 204.70.20.6 nearnet.Boston.mci.net. (239 ms) (504 ms) (188 ms) 10: 192.233.33.3 ihtfp.mit.edu. (310 ms) (515 ms) (198 ms) 11: 18.168.0.6 B24-RTR-FDDI.MIT.EDU. (574 ms) (166 ms) (345 ms) 12: 18.23.0.15 massis.lcs.mit.edu. (510 ms) (256 ms) (438 ms) ping -s massis.lcs.mit.edu indicates about 5% packet loss. A roundtrip delay from 141-782 milliseconds is noticeable, but not crippling; far better than we endured ten years ago on the ARPAnet. TELECOM Digest Editor continues: > All the newcomers with their web pages have turned the Internet into a > terrible disaster. I strongly favor what Berkeley is proposing: start > an entirely new network and abandon this current one entirely, leaving The value of the network is in the universal connectivity. The current proposal for "Internet II" is essentially a suggestion for reviving the old "Universities-only" ARPAnet, complete with the NSF "Acceptable Use Policy". It is bad policy: A porkbarrel boondoggle. > I do not think > ever in the past the congestion has been as bad as it has been the > past year or so. Mail delivery takes absolutely *forever*; there are > people getting the Digest as long as a day or two days after it is > issued here. How fast we forget ... ten years ago, we felt that a week was an appropriate time for USENET messages to propagate cross-country. Now we are so used to seeing them within minutes of posting, that we complain when there is a delay in delivery. PAT, I think you're barking up the wrong tree, confusing local underprovisioning with a congested backbone. Who is your ISP? My guess is that it's not MCSnet. Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@OSICOM.COM OSICOM Technologies (Internet Business Unit, formerly RNS) 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Telephone: +1-805-562-3158 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Compuserve very kindly provides me with a connection at no charge to telnet to lcs.mit.edu via a local phone number here in Skokie. I shouldn't complain too much or too loudly I guess. I dial into a local number, connect to their network and issue a certain command to then reach MIT or other .edu sites where I am a guest user. But some days it is awfully slow. Essentially, my ISP is lcs.mit.edu and my various other .edu accounts at several sites around the USA. I sometimes use my eecs.nwu.edu account to telnet in which is also a local phone call. I also have an account with iquest.net. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #612 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 13 23:33:13 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA26958; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 23:33:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 23:33:13 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611140433.XAA26958@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #613 TELECOM Digest Wed, 13 Nov 96 23:33:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 613 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line (Tony Toews) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Tony Toews) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Craig Partridge) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Louis Raphael) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Tim Russell) Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA (Lloyd Matthews) Book Review: "Learning Networks" by Harasim/Hiltz/Teles/Turoff (Rob Slade) Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs (Craig Partridge) Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs (Bill Sohl) Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming (John R. Levine) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: ttoews@agt.net (Tony Toews) Subject: Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 02:15:39 GMT Organization: TELUS Communications Inc. Larry English wrote: > Suddenly a new feature has appeared on my residential phone line. > I noticed that if I'm talking to someone, I can "flash" the hookswitch, > make another call [without disconnecting the first call], and then > either confer with a second caller until they hang up, or I can > flash again and then be talking to both callees. > Can I get charged for trying/using this? I'm sure you ARE! > I don't really even want it -- it makes it hard to be sure when you > have really terminated a call, since if you don't hold the hook down > long enough, you might be making an accidental conference call. Yup. There was a message from our provincial telco telling us about it in our last phone bill. Up here it costs either a monthly fee, the way it was, or on a per call fee, 35 cents if memory serves. I'm currently paying the monthly fee on one of my phone lines because when you need it for business purposes it comes in real handy. But I only use it once a month or less. So now I'm going to drop it and use the per call basis. > [. If you call the telco, you can probably > get them to remove it from your line if you don't want it. PAT] Don't count on that. My impression of the telco consumer level explanation was that now modems and faxes have to wait at least two seconds before making another call. ie, two seconds of hook time otherwise this feature would kick in. So it could be one of those telco switch upgrade features we get "for free" and with no choice. OTOH you could be correct. By complaining maybe they can remove it on a line by line case. Tony Toews, Independent Computer Consultant Jack of a few computer related trades and master (or certified) of none. Microsoft Access Hints & Tips: Accounting Systems, Winfax Pro, Reports and Books at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm ------------------------------ From: ttoews@agt.net (Tony Toews) Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 02:15:45 GMT Organization: TELUS Communications Inc. Ian Angus wrote: > Of course the real solution would be for US companies with 800 and 888 > numbers to realize that they have potential customers outside of the > 50 states. This is a continuing grievance for Canadians, who could > dial the 800 numbers if only the companies advertising them would > instruct their carriers to allow calls from Canada. After all we're a potential market about the size of California! And we don't have much else to do up here in winter! Actually the situation is much better than it was years ago when telco rules wouldn't allow this. I can also recall seeing many ads which stated 800 this for the US but 800 that for one particular state. > It's even worse in other parts of the world -- it's astounding how > many computer companies, for example, run ads which are seen world > wide, with no method of contact except a US-only 800 or 888 number. At least web sites help with that problem. And most post a regular fax number so you can get them that way. But right now there's a small outfit whose information consists of an US only 800 sales number and a fax number. No email or website. I've looked up the phone number via Infoseek and see a somewhat similar name. But there's no answer at that phone number. So as much as I'd like more information on that company's product and I'd likely spend some money on it, I can't. Oh, and no response yet from the fax I sent about a week ago. I guess they don't want my money. Back in the days before the web and newsgroups, at least available in rural Alberta, I used to ask folks in my favourite Fidonet echo's to phone the 800's for me and post their real number. Or if their address was available, and many times it wasn't, I'd try directory assistance. Which now costs. Tony Toews, Independent Computer Consultant Jack of a few computer related trades and master (or certified) of none. Microsoft Access Hints & Tips: Accounting Systems, Winfax Pro, Reports and Books at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm ------------------------------ From: craigp@world.std.com (Craig Partridge) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 21:01:30 GMT lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) writes: > PAT, I think you're barking up the wrong tree, confusing local > underprovisioning with a congested backbone. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Compuserve very kindly provides me with > a connection at no charge to telnet to lcs.mit.edu via a local phone > number here in Skokie. I shouldn't complain too much or too loudly I > guess. I dial into a local number, connect to their network and issue > a certain command to then reach MIT or other .edu sites where I am a > guest user. But some days it is awfully slow. Essentially, my ISP is > lcs.mit.edu and my various other .edu accounts at several sites around > the USA. I sometimes use my eecs.nwu.edu account to telnet in which is > also a local phone call. I also have an account with iquest.net. PAT] Another good question to ask is: How many ISPs is PAT going through? For instance, right now, there's a shortage of capacity between SprintLink and BBN Planet (according to the network trouble tickets BBN sends its customers) resulting in a 35% loss rate at certain times of day. Upgrade expected by Sprint in a few days. TCP slows way down in the face of loss. More generally, cross ISP trunking often isn't as good as it should be. Craig ------------------------------ From: Louis Raphael Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 20:02:02 -0500 Organization: PubNIX Montreal > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that from my location > here, things have become horrible. Having a 28.8 modem on the line means > absolutely nothing. I might as well go back to having a 300 baud modem. That's what I hear everywhere, but in all honesty, I can't say that the same is true here. Years ago, telnet'ing from this account to my father's account (at a local university -- but still requiring a detour via the US) was so slow that checking one's mail remotely was excruciating at best. Now, it's passable most of the time. I guess that the connection was really bad *then* ... (RISQnet used to have a fractional T1 for the *whole* province back then!) > All the newcomers with their web pages have turned the Internet into a > terrible disaster. I couldn't agree more. My guess (not supported by a $500,000 study!) is that the biggest and most useless cause of congestion is probably those stupid graphics on web pages -- the ones that nobody looks at anyways. Personally, I still use LYNX most of the time -- and am quite satisfied with it, and with the knowledge that transmitting a page of text requires minimal resources by comparison to a page of graphics. If people voluntarily removed the useless graphics (and they aren't *all* useless - but I would guess that somewhere in the area of 90% are) from their web pages, 'net congestion would probably be relieved almost immediately ... both because of fewer graphics being downloaded, and because a certain category of surfer that "likes to look at the pictures" would become rarer. One would think that the connected would try to increase their available bandwidth by removing such things from their web sites, but bandwidth is cheap enough that they often don't - and that bandwidth doesn't deliver. Possibly, one could also blame the major providers for overselling bandwidth, as compared to what is really available. > Mail delivery takes absolutely *forever*; I've had that happen. I quite often get four-hour notices when mailing certain people nowadays. *That* I find terrible. E-mail is one of the most useful features of the 'net, and one that requires very little in the way of resources -- yet often unusable because of the surfers. It would be good if there were some mechanism for reserving a small percentage of bandwidth for e-mail -- and that's all it would take (remember how much e-mail BITnet could handle on 14.4K lines?). Louis ------------------------------ From: russell@probe.net (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 13 Nov 1996 08:46:36 GMT Organization: Probe Technology Internet Services tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) writes: > Higher Fees at Peak Hours Might Ease Logjams, According to U. Texas Study > By Lori Hawkins, Austin American-Statesman, Texas > Nov. 7--People pay more to make long-distance phone calls during peak > times. Soon, Internet surfers may do the same. IMHO, this is a bad idea. Just because right now, the peak time is a certain time of the day, doesn't mean it would stay that way once a daytime-based pricing scheme is put into place. What are we going to do, have weekly updates mailed out to everyone on the net with the Peak Time Of The Week? Better is to wait for the RSVP standards to be implemented and get a proper interface to it to the users' desktops. Users would normally use a default "priority", or whatever it's called, and not get charged anything extra. If they're unsatisfied with response times, give them a way to kick up their priority and pay extra for it. As an ISP, billing for this would add extra pain, but, given the proper software integrated from desktop to router, I don't feel it would add a ton. There would have to be a protocol to allow our router to link packets to usernames, standard billing record formats output, etc, but it's nothing that hasn't been tackled before and overcome. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that from my location > here, things have become horrible. Having a 28.8 modem on the line means > absolutely nothing. I might as well go back to having a 300 baud modem. Maybe from where you sit, Pat, but not here. Sitting on the MCI backbone, with access to a full T1, I regularly get transfer rates of 45K/second or more to sites all over the net, and I'm sure that's often more limited by the speed of my PC than by net throughput. I would, however, appreciate a way to slow things down when I'm not worried about speed, which is quite often. RSVP would provide that, since it works both ways, allowing me to lower my "priority". One large problem that I often see lies in the inability from the user's point of view to tell whether it's the net on the whole that's slow (i.e. the backbone), the far provider's connection that's swamped, or the far host that's slow. Quite often I receive calls from users asking why the net's so slow, while I'm in the midst of downloading the new version of Internet Explorer at 45K/second or more. Needless to say, since they're at 28,800 bps and noticing slowdowns, while I'm at T1 speeds and seeing none, something else is at work here. I'm not sure what (if anything) can be done about that, but I am convinced that this perception issue is a large part of the "problem", which, truthfully, I can't say I've really seen as yet. Tim Russell System Admin, Probe Technology email: russell@probe.net ------------------------------ From: Lloyd Matthews Subject: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 13:05:56 +0000 Organization: TRW-SIG Sunnyvale Reply-To: lloydm@pop.svl.trw.com I do business in DC and California, and recently got a Sprint Spectrum PCS phone (which currently works only in DC/Baltimore) under the impression that it would be "nationwide by the end of1996." Whenever I call to confirm this, Sprint refers me to some marketing flack or other who all seem to have the party line of "everything will be up sometime in 1997, maybe". Each PCS metropolitan area seems to be its own city-state running its own show on its own schedule, and Sprint HQ in Kansas City doesn't have any sort of summary. Can anyone tell me how to get Sprint's actual plan for service throughout California? Also, PacBell flacks don't seem to have any clue about their PCS service. Does anyone know if it will be GSM and compatible with my Ericsson phone, and when it will be rolled out throughout California? Thanks! Lloyd Matthews (Lloyd.Matthews@trw.com) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 11:59:46 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Learning Networks" by Harasim/Hiltz/Teles/Turoff BKLRNNTW.RVW 960728 "Learning Networks", Harasim/Hiltz/Teles/Turoff, 1995, 0-262-08236-5, U$35.00 %A Linda Harasim %A Starr Roxanne Hiltz %A Lucio Teles %A Murray Turoff %C 55 Hayward Street, Cambridge, MA 02142-1399 %D 1995 %G 0-262-08236-5 %I MIT Press %O U$35.00 curtin@mit.edu %P 329 %T "Learning Networks" Devoted to the topic of the use of computer-mediated communication tools for teaching, this book is a rather pedestrian collection of anecdotes and suggestions. While the material is not impractical, it could be inspiring only to those who have no experience with telecommunications tools. This is particularly disappointing in light of Hiltz and Turoff's excellent "Network Nation" (cf. BKNTNATN.RVW). That earlier work has become a classic due to a timeless insightfulness which is completely lacking in the current book. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKLRNNTW.RVW 960728 Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | Computer user thinks Institute for rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | the machine just works for him Research into Rob.Slade@f733.n153.z1/| Monkey disagrees User .fidonet.org| Security Canada V7K 2G6 | - virus haiku ------------------------------ From: craigp@world.std.com (Craig Partridge) Subject: Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 21:10:35 GMT Joe Jensen writes: > The long hold time associated with Internet access is a REAL problem. > To understand why, you need to understand that the switch is > engineered to support specified concentration ratio across the central > office, typically somewhere between 4:1 to 8:1. An important detail here. How sacred is that ratio? My understanding is that it varies. And in a world where 1 Gb/s data paths are commonplace in boxes and depreciation cycles are going down sharply (I think PACBELL said they're now using five or seven years?), just how horribly expensive is it to upgrade? The broader issue here is that (a) we know that there's plenty of underutilized fiber trunking and (b) that telephone switches, while cutting edge in terms of reliability, aren't near cutting edge on performance. So it would seem that there's plenty of opportunity to spend a little money and get out from under the bandwidth limitations? (I should be clear here I'm talking about local service -- the long lines guys are definitely dealing with cutting edge bandwidth problems -- OC-48c isn't simple). Craig ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 04:08:40 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises Joe Jensen wrote: > Craig Nordin wrote: >> I would love to find out what the Bell-owned ISPs say about this ISP >> vs. Bell issue (ISPs said to cause telco gridlock). > I would venture to say that the technical folks dealing with the > traffic issues relative to ISP access have never talked to the > Bell-owned ISPs. For example, in one Bell company I am familiar with, > the engineering function isn't in the same state as the internet > service provider entity. This still doesn't offer any insight into the paradox that the situation presents ... i.e. the same telco that complains about long holding times has a business unit that is one of the alleged creators of the problem. > The long hold time associated with Internet access is a REAL problem. > To understand why, you need to understand that the switch is > engineered to support specified concentration ratio across the central > office, typically somewhere between 4:1 to 8:1. The problem occurs > because at the lowest level of the switch where the concentration > occurs, the ratio could be 128 customers to 16 switch ports. An > example could find the ISP with 8 of the 128 lines in this > concentration group. If those lines are continually busy, that would > leave only 8 switch ports for the other 120 customers. That turns out > to a concentration ratio of 15:1. The other customers can start > seeing delays in receiving dialtone or no dialtone at all. However, the problems alleged so far have not been dial tine issues, but rather a lack of transmission paths, either intraswitch or iinterswitch. > To counteract this, the telco must reengineer the switch at the lowest > level and spread the "offending" ISP lines across more concentration > groups. That's not reengineering, it is load balancing and should have been done properly in the first place. > To offer the same level of service the telco must "deload" the > concentration groups so the equipment that had originally support 512 > customers may now only support 480 or less. The engineering also costs > time and money. But poor planning upfront doesn't excuse the subsequent need for the load balancing down the road. > What is the long range solution? Get the internet traffic off the voice > switch. That's one possibility, others (eg. non-blocking switches) also exist or are in development. > Both ADSL and cable modems provide a reasonable solution to > this problem. The telcos are in a bind. Do they spend the time and > money to reengineer the switch only to have the traffic pulled off when > new the new technology arrives? I am glad I don't have to answer that > question, but as a cableco anticipating offering internet access over > cable modems next year, I am certainly willing to help. Time will tell; the evolution of the network is truly a wonder to watch. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 96 20:28 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. [quoting this week's smarmiest spam] >> I am against SPAM, and am therefore asking you to e-mail me your >> permission before I send you anything. ... >> Received: from servo.earthstar.com by iquest.net with smtp Earthstar.com appears to be spam-only, as do the other sites on the same network mailpro.com, primeleads.com, and earthonline, all operating out of a mail drop in Bellevue, Washington. I found that adjusting my router to discard any packets coming from their network 207.14.56 improved my quality of life. Incidentally, have you seen the messages from Sanford Wallace offering to pay anyone with a T1 feed if he can put a spam-generating PC on their network? Pitiful. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Instead of disgarding their packets, shouldn't you be returning their packets to them, with a few packets of your own saying in effect 'mail from your site is not welecome here' or words to that effect. As it stands now, they are just assuming the users at your site are not interested in the current spam offering and they will continue to send various offerings. Why not be frank and upfront with them about it? You can still automate the process and not have to examine it all when it comes in. One person has suggested that in his mail filter, he is taking all the offending locations and running them through a script that sends back the them the spam along with a short cover note expressing his own disgust. In his note he does allow them to actually him by saying if mail comes from 'postmaster' at that given site he will personally attend to it (one time only, provided it is not still more spam) so that they can get to him from that site should there be legitimate mail ever forthcoming (doubtful). In his script then, he first treats mail from 'postmaster' sending it one way and he then treats mail which falls through to the next level which includes an examination of the site names looking for the offenders, etc. PAT[ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #613 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 14 01:29:43 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA05769; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 01:29:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 01:29:43 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611140629.BAA05769@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #614 TELECOM Digest Thu, 14 Nov 96 01:29:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 614 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nynex (NY) Improving (Yes, imnsho) "Call Return" (Danny Burstein) Re: Help With Answering Machine (Julie Lumine) Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line (Nils Andersson) Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line (Mark Brader) Re: Brokerages Fined for Dialing No Call Lists (Steven V. Christensen) Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? (John Higdon) Re: Prison Telephone Revenues (Nils Andersson) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Nils Andersson) Latest Caribbean Scam (Curtis Wheeler) Home 800 Service Clarified (Mark Tomlinson) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Clayton Walker) Re: Florida's 904 Area Code to Split - AGAIN! (Wes Leatherock) Final Version of the NRC Crypto Report is Now Available! (Monty Solomon) Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service (Linc Madison) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 13 Nov 1996 17:47:34 EST From: danny burstein Subject: Nynex (NY) Improving (Yes, imnsho) "Call Return" When the movie "The Pelican Brief" opened to rave reviews, many people asked how Denzel Washington was able to 'trap' the phone number of the person who called him. (His character punched in a telco code, and he exclaimed "gotcha"). Turned out that in some areas (like NYC), "call return" simply dialed back to the original caller. In others, it first read back (via synthesized voice) the phone number and then offered to dial it. Anyway, NYC is about to do the upgrade. As per a Nynex legal notice 13-nov-1996: Notice of Proposed Tariff for the Introduction of an Enhancement to the Call Return feature of Phonesmart services ... effective November 30, 1996, .. an enhancement to ... Call Return. Presently, when customers dial *69, the call is automatically returned. As of the effective date, depending on central office, when customers dial *69 they will receive an audible announcement of the telephone number, date, and time of the last incoming call. In addition, the customer will have the option of automatic call return by pressing the number "1" to complete the call. If the incoming call is number-blocked by per-call or all-call blocking, the called party will _not_ (emphasis added) be able to identify or return the call by activating the call return feature. *********** Additional notes by db: In roughly half of Nynex territory, this is still an irrelevancy. Calls coming to or from a 1AESS switch do NOT send out caller ID so you can't return calls to them (and they can't do it themselves either.) Also, in some areas of the country the local systems get around blocking by letting you return the call, but NOT showing you the number you've redialed. i.e. your bill will show 555-0000 instead of 555-1212. dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 13:25:51 -0800 From: Julie Lumine Reply-To: juliel@mtcworld.com Organization: MTC Subject: Re: Help With Answering Machine johngee@nmia.com wrote: > I purchased an AT&T digital answering machine at a garage sale. It > didn't have an instruction manual with it, and I need help trying to > program it. It is a phone as well, with the handset on the left. On > the right are a slide volume control and buttons marked "memo, delete, > fwd, stop, repeat, off/on and play." An LED display shows the number > of calls received. The only marking that *may* be a model number on > the underside of the set is 91EP. If anyone can help by e-mailing me > or faxing me the programming instructions, I'd be very grateful. What I normally do is to get the phone in front of me, call the "AT&T Phone Store", or whatever name/address might be listed on any identifying labels on the phone, get and 800 number for manufacturer's repair, and order a booklet from them. This way, you have all you need for reference ... the more buttons/features, the more you'll need this! Many manufacturers will give them free. ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com Subject: Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line Date: 13 Nov 1996 17:27:19 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Larry English writes: > What is it even called? 3-way calling? Yes indeed. Most telcos charge per month for this, NOT per call, except for normal call charges. Typically, in the US, the telco thinks it knows what is best for you, so when you repeatedly hit the hook switch you get your "second line", then maybe "both", then maybe "first", "second" etc, I am not sure if the algorithm is used everywhere. With call waiting, it is different in that the second call is incoming (it does not seem to matter if the first call is incoming or outgoing). In this case, repeated hook switch hits will typically never bring out "both", on the assumption that the calls are unrelated. (In Europe, and when using cellphones, this works differently, and you typically can hit some number to switch to "first", "second" and "both", and even disconnect "first", "second" and "both". I do not believe this is well standardized. Comments anybody? Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 18:32:48 GMT Larry English (lenglish@atlanta.nsc.com) writes: > Suddenly a new feature has appeared on my residential phone line. > I noticed that if I'm talking to someone, I can "flash" the hookswitch, > make another call [without disconnecting the first call], and then ... Pat responds: > It is known as 'Three Way Calling' and some telcos have begun > offering it on a 'per-use' basis as well as by monthly subscription. Here in Bell Canada land, if you buy three-way calling by the month, it works as Larry describes. But if you don't subscribe and want to use it, then you have to dial *71. This eliminates the hazard that people unaware of having the service might use it accidentally and incur the pay-per-use charge, as Larry has probably done. I do subscribe (though I don't really use the feature often enough to justify it), so I don't know if hookflashing is required in conjunction with *71. I would hope that it is, otherwise three-way calling might be activated accidentally when one is touch-toning through an interactive response system. With Bell Canada, the per-use fee is 50 cents Canadian and the monthly fee is $3 Canadian, each plus taxes (15% in Ontario). The monthly fee may be reduced if other special features are purchased. I think there is a monthly maximum on the per-use fee, twice the subscription fee; at least, that's the way some of the subscription-or-per-use services work. Mark Brader, msb@sq.com, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto ------------------------------ From: chrissv@cat.com (Steven V. Christensen) Subject: Re: Brokerages Fined for Dialing No Call Lists Date: 13 Nov 1996 18:11:25 GMT Organization: pobox.com Reply-To: chrissv@pobox.com In article in comp.dcom.telecom, Tad Cook (tad@ssc.com) wrote: > Brokerages Pay Fine for Dialing Florida 'No Call' Listings > By Helen Huntley, St. Petersburg Times, Fla. > Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News > Nov. 11--Four big brokerage firms landed in hot water with the state > for making cold calls to Floridians on the "no sales solicitation > calls" list. [snip] > Residential numbers can be placed on the list for a $10 enrollment fee > and a $5 annual renewal fee. For information call (800) 435-7352. How does this list differ from the list that phone solicitors are supposed to have, which you can be added by simply asking, "Place me on your 'do not call' list" ? Steven From the desk of: Steven Christensen N9XJY Internet: chrissv@pobox.com ------------------------------ Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 11:01:06 -0800 From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Internet Gridlocks Phone Network? dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) wrote: > That is already the case in some areas, and for some classes of > customers. If you purchase flat-rate local telephone service, then > you are subsidized by somebody else -- especially if you use more of > the service than an `average' subscriber of your class. That is way too simplistic. It could very well be argued that under measured plans, those who do not use the phone at all are being subsidized by those who do. The facilities associated with the subscriber drop are absolutely fixed, costing exactly the same with no usage or twenty-four hour a day usage. He who generates no revenue (i.e. makes no calls) is being subsidized by one who pays through the nose. The cost of completing local calls is associated with build-out of plant; there are no incremental, per-call costs. Furthermore, and the Bells are well aware of this, many people get flat-rate service out of "habit" and fear of being charged for local calls, even though the actual traffic is very low. I did a little cost analysis of my own sixteen residential lines and discovered that my flat-rate lines are actually (given the few calls made on them) subsidizing someone else. How? If I had the available measured service option on those lines, my total monthly bill would be considerably LOWER. In other words, telco would be getting LESS money from me for providing exactly the same service if I had measured rather than flat-rate. Making the blanket statement "flat-rate is subsidized by others" sounds like Telco Babble, particularly if everyone is paying the same flat rate. > Pay-as-you-use is likely the way of the future (except in areas where > it is currently the way of the present). The right solution to the > Internet connectivity issue is to use a non-switched infrastructure > (e.g. CATV). In the past, talkpaths were very expensive, requiring a copper pair for each and every conversation. Now, conversations are multiplexed on fiber lines that are almost unlimited in capacity. Adding a few thousand talkpaths means buying some relatively cheap channelization equipment or line cards for switches -- not stringing new cable at great expense. So why, pray tell, should the future be measured rates -- particularly when the incremental cost of completing calls as compared to days gone by has fallen through the floor? I do agree, however, that distributing the Internet through the switched network is a waste and misuse of the technology. That it why my Internet connection is via frame relay. 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: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Prison Telephone Revenues Date: 13 Nov 1996 19:19:18 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Michael Wengler writes: > In my opinion, separate facilities with separate rules should be used > for people awaiting trial. AT LEAST, those facilities should include > access to telephones on which 800 numbers can be dialed. What's wrong with giving prisoners (of either kind) plain ordinary pay phones? If considered necessary, they could even be wiretapped, I am talking about the freedom to communicate, not the freedom to organize crimes. NOTE: There is a business niche here for a service that would manually or automatically accept collect calls and then let the caller punch in where he really wants to call. Not everybody in the hoosegow has bad credit! Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: 13 Nov 1996 19:19:20 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Ian Angus writes: > It's even worse in other parts of the world -- it's astounding how > many computer companies, for example, run ads which are seen world > wide, with no method of contact except a US-only 800 or 888 number. Right On!!!! The simplest solution for non-NANP countries would be to allow 800 calls, and charge for them. Being that they are preceded with a country code, there should be no confusion. Another (quite compatible) solution is the 880/881 overlay of 800/888, where the call gets charged. This can be used when calling from inside or outside the NANP. (Does it work? Comments anyone?) One catch with both solutions is that 800-numbers would have to be unique within the NANP (i.e. country code 1), not just unique within one country. Thus, they would have to follow the same standards as any other area code (except the ill-fated 700 ...). When Sweden started toll-free numbers (020), I could dial them from the US by dialling normally, 011-46-20-xx xx xx, but after about a year they suddenly disallowed that. I have no idea why. Same issue for other countries with toll-free area codes. Why not simply allow them when coming from another country code? Another issue: What happened with the ITU desision to implement international toll free? How will it work? I asked AT&T and they said they would get back to me, and did not. Will there be a special country code? Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: Curtis Wheeler Subject: Latest Caribbean Scam Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 11:26:39 -0800 Organization: Just Me and My Own Opinions Reply-To: cwheeler@ricochet.net The {San Franscisco Chronicle} and other bay area news souces are warning about another phone scam from the Caribbean. If you want to read about that you can see it on page A17 of the 11/13/96 Chron at http://www.sfgate.com but we all know how they work. My question is -- why do we allow 1+NPA dialing to places like the Domincan Republic? It seems that "not knowing" what you are dialing is the same arguement used against are code overlays, so why do we allow a confusing (to the average Joe) system that allows people to unkowingly dial expensive, overseas calls. I kinda like the 01+country method. At least there is no doubt that I am calling out of the country. I am sure this is not technical -- is it marketing huh? Regards, Curtis ------------------------------ From: mtdiver@aol.com (Mark Tomlinson) Subject: Home 800 Number Clarified Date: 14 Nov 1996 03:44:41 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com In my recent response to the posting by the gentleman who was having problems with MCI ONE, I suggested an alternative. Pat the editor, suggested that I might be hiding gimmicks and/or was not being forthright with the info to the newsgroup. In the interest of good ethics, here's the scoop: The Company: LCI INTERNATIONAL The terms: No terms. The cost: None. No setup fee. No monthly fee. The rate: First 120 minutes are a penny a minute; 25 cents a minute thereafter. Calling area: Continental US Restrictions: None Minimums: None Calling Circles: None Billing intervals: six seconds The "Catch": Must have LCI as primary LD carrier Additional benefits: 1. No cost to switch. LCI pays fee. 2. 90 day switch back gaurantee in writing. 3. Low calling card surcharge (45 cents) 4. Postalized rates (0.19 weekday, 0.14 evening, 0.12 nights/weekends) to anywhere in continental US. 5. First hour on calling card a penny a minute. 6. Eight major holidays where first 30 minutes are a penny a minute. 7. Dial One service-no access codes. 8. 100% digital fiber optic network. No reselling. I hope this clears up any misconceptions on what I was trying to share with the group. If anyone would like to try LCI, I would appreciate hearing from you so I might help get the ball rolling. Remember, this is a NO RISK, NO COST offer to help you save a little hard earned money. You have nothing to lose, and possibly a lot to gain. I look forward to hearing from you! Sincerely, Mark Tomlinson MTDIVER@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks very much for the additional infor- mation about the service. I would also remind everyone that if you get an 800 number from Call Home America (a division of Frontier) then you will get ten dollars credit and **so will I**. They charge $3.95 per month and typical per minute rates for peak and off peak times. It can ring wherever you tell them to set it to ring. You do not need to have their long distance service on any of your lines, however they will try to sell this to you as well. You can reach Call Home America at 800-594-5900. Ask them to apply the ten dollar referral credit to account number 0201355818, which is in the name of Patrick Townson. ... I've used their 800 service and their cellular service (reselling Ameritech in the Chicago area) for some time now and am satisfied with it. Refer to promotional offer ZREF-09. Thanks for the help. The deal from LCI mentioned above also seems to be pretty reasonable. PAT] ------------------------------ From: spinal@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 13 Nov 1996 03:53:00 GMT Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that from my location > here, things have become horrible. Having a 28.8 modem on the line means > absolutely nothing. I might as well go back to having a 300 baud modem. > All the newcomers with their web pages have turned the Internet into a > terrible disaster. I strongly favor what Berkeley is proposing: start > an entirely new network and abandon this current one entirely, leaving > it to the companies who seem to feel they have to use all sorts of > graphics and sounds and other bandwidth/resource-wasting spectacles > on their web pages for the benefit of people who like 'surfing the > net', which is a category of people I generally dislike anyway. I have > to sit here and watch my keystrokes bounce back to me five and ten > seconds after I type them thanks to people like that who want to > download some gaudy display from someone's web page. I do not think > ever in the past the congestion has been as bad as it has been the > past year or so. Mail delivery takes absolutely *forever*; there are > people getting the Digest as long as a day or two days after it is > issued here. I can recall when the entire mailing list was finished > in a matter of several hours. Yes, by all means, turn this over to > the net-surfers and let's move elsewhere. PAT] In the three years I've been on the Internet, the seven years I've been in telecommunications, and the ten years total I've been in computing, I have never seen anything so slow as the Internet has become, especially in the past month or thereabouts. It now takes me three tries on average to get through to altavista, and that's through a dedicated T3. Up until very recently, I was content with a copy of NCSA Telnet, and maybe Eudora Light, but that was it. Now, it's gotten where 20% (and that's a quite conservative estimate) of web pages, when I load them with Lynx, give me that nasty "Please download a frames/java/insert-your-own-RAM-hogging feature-here capable browser" message. I can't read any unmoderated newsgroups without wading through tens and hundreds of "Make Money Fast" or "Free XXX Site Found" postings. I say one night we go all over the world and replace every copy of Netscape Navigator with NCSA Telnet, and see how many disgruntled users wonder "What happened to that Internet program?" I can't tell you how much it aggravates me when people come to me, the resident computer nerd at my school, and ask how they get on the Internet from their computer at home. I ask, "What Internet Service Provider do you use?" They reply, cheerfully, "America Online." And I say, in a most curteous voice, "Well, to get on the Internet you need an Internet Service Provider." "But I told you, I have AOL!" "Well, to get on the Internet you need an Internet Service Provider." Sometimes, some of the more dense of them will keep at that for several times, until they walk off, bewildered. This year alone, I've had to hang up on three different guys from my school on multiple occasions, late at night, who call me asking how to download and I quote, "Nudies of that Jenny McCarty chick on MTV." And I wonder sometimes why we've been labeled Generation X, the no-good slackers associated with that no-good smutfest called the Internet. Perhaps in five years the trend will have passed, and we can have our old Internet back, where Netscape Navigator and AOL are simply memories. With visions of an Internet to come, Clayton Walker spinal@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that when Citizens Band Radio began going -- if you will pardon me -- to hell, we said much the same thing: give it a little time, within a few years it will have gotten back to normal. And indeed, today CB is just as quiet in many areas as it was back in the early 1960's when it was a relatively sophisticated communications tool used by a small number of people. The trouble is, the battle or the war or whatever you want to call it took a lot of very good people in the process. From the middle 1970's to about 1985, CB radio was just a total shambles, having fallen apart rapidly once several million Americans discovered it and started using it. For a decade or so from about 1965-75, it served us very well; really it was the Usenet of that era (as we older netizens remember Usenet in the 1980's). Sometime around 1975 we saw it getting out of control. We saw all the old customs, the gentlemen's agreements being ignored, if the hordes of new people even knew such customs and agreements had existed and served us well for a decade. When the really obnoxious users of CB finally got tired and saw they were not going to Make Money Fast, and all the scammers and spammers of CB were finally 'defeated' -- if you want to phrase it that way -- whole bunches of the fine people we chatted with over the years prior were no where to be found either. True, many of them were by then starting to 'get into' home computers and they found the new (at the time in the early 1980's) service from Compuserve called 'CB Simulator' to be a welcome change of pace, but there were also a large number who just unplugged their radio and put it in the closet to gather dust. I think you will see that happen here on the net also. Now CB radio is mostly quiet except for the all too frequent ignoramus screaming across the entire country with a huge amount of illegal power. The newsgroups of Usenet will still be around several years from now, but you'll see a relatively small amount of traffic compared to today, and much of it will just be nonsensical stuff. The rest of us will have migrated to whatever replaces this medium we are using now, just as we abandoned CB for computers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 03:11:44 GMT Organization: Hotel California BBS Subject: Re: Florida's 904 Area Code to Split - AGAIN! Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > Area Code maps beginning around 1960 shows 813 covering from 'just' > the Tampa Bay area and southward. It was the only area code in the > continental US which was *exclusively* non-Bell. GTE and (Sprint's) > United Telco are the only two LEC's (telcos) which have been in the > 813 NPA. Ten or fifteen5 years ago I was in this part of Florida on vacation, and I was amused to discover that United (not yet part of Sprint) was a "connecting company" in GTE's eyes. Not too long before the GTE operation had been the entirely independent Penisular Telephone Company. Incidentally, a very minor nitpick: I think you meant to say area code 813 was the only area code in the _coterminous_ US which was exclusively non-Bell. Alaska is continental US, too. Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 03:14:40 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Final Version of the NRC Crypto Report is Now Available! Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 18.60 Date: Fri, 08 Nov 96 15:28:00 EST From: "CRYPTO" Subject: The final version of the NRC crypto report is now available! The Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB) of the National Research Council (NRC) is pleased to announce the availability of its cryptography policy study "Cryptography's Role in Securing the Information Society". This report was originally released in pre-publication form on May 30, 1996. The final printed version of this report can be obtained from the National Academy Press, 1-800-624-6242 or Web site http://www.nap.edu/bookstore. The pre-publication version and the final printed copy differ in that the printed copy contains an index and many source documents relevant to the crypto policy debate; of course, editorial corrections have been made as well. An unofficial ASCII version of the prepublication report can be found at http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/nrcindex.htm; the official NRC version should become available online in ASCII form in December. In addition, CSTB has been conducting briefings on this report at various sites around the country; if you would like to arrange a briefing in your area, please let us know (cstb@nas.edu, 202-334-2605). [Message from Herb Lin] [I note that when we held a briefing on the West Coast, Herb was surprised to find that a scanned copy of the original report had already appeared on-line, shortly after the draft report had been released. The final version is over 700 pages with all the appendices. But I suspect that an unofficial on-line version of the official report may not be far behind -- despite its copyright. Incidentally, the full report is an extraordinary source of background material. PGN] ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 17:28:16 -0800 In article , PAT added: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A lot of the carriers are now including > a provision in their contract which says you agree that when you give > up their service you give up your right to the number as well, or any > right to transfer it to a different carrier. PAT] Isn't that FLAGRANTLY illegal? That should be a nice court case for some lawyer who salivates at the mention of "punitive damages"! Linc Madison * San Francisco, CA * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think it is legal if you agree to it as part of a contract. If there was no contract and later on you wished to change carriers and keep the number, they would be unable to stop you. What I have head is that a lot of people did just that: they got a 'good number' from one carrier then carted it off to another carrier. The first carrier tried to stop it only to have their efforts to 'save their number' thwarted. So now they specifically make it part of their contract; it becomes a matter of contract law rather than tariff or FCC regulation, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #614 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 14 21:32:57 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id VAA10269; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 21:32:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 21:32:57 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611150232.VAA10269@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #615 TELECOM Digest Thu, 14 Nov 96 21:33:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 615 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telemarketer Indicted: Posed as IRS Agent! (Tad Cook) Calculating Usage From a Telco "Busy Study" (David Langlois) Pay-Per-Use Services (was Re: Sudden New Feature ...) (Mark J. Cuccia) WIPO Database Treaty -- Sign-on Letter (Craig A. Johnson) 765 Approved for Indiana Relief (James E. Bellaire) Re: Brokerages Fined / Many Are Called - You May Collect (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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Telemarketer Indicted: Posed as IRS Agent! Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 14:57:16 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Telemarketer Indicted for Posing as IRS Agent LAS VEGAS (AP) -- A Las Vegas telemarketer has been indicted on charges he posed as an Internal Revenue Service employee to bilk $524,000 from victims in nine states. Brian Bonito was named in a federal indictment Wednesday on 63 counts of wire fraud, mail fraud, impersonating a federal employee and aiding and abetting. He was also named in one forfeiture count. Bonito told 13 victims of fraudulent telemarketing operators that their money had been recovered and that he would reimburse them if they made upfront payments for taxes, according to the indictment. He used a number of false names in making the telephone calls, the indictment said. In some cases, he told the individuals the upfront payments had to be made in cash by overnight mail. The incidents, which occurred from Sept. 28, 1995, to March 13, 1996, involved people who "due to age or other condition, were vulnerable to further telemarketing fraud," the indictment said. The victims were from Illinois, California, Tennessee, Utah, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia and Nebraska. Bonito is scheduled to be arraigned on the charges Nov. 22. ------------------------------ From: David Langlois Subject: Calculating Usage From a Telco "Busy Study" Date: 14 Nov 1996 20:17:08 GMT Organization: Associated Systems Inc. Maybe someone out there can help. I have a "Central Office Subscriber Line Usage Study" from a mid-west Canadian telco (also known as a "busy study") for several lines (both urban and rural). Even though there is a name and number for a contact person, I am having no luck at all in arriving at answers to some of my questions. So hopefully one of you will be able to assist me here. One of the urban studies contains the following information on page 1: DATE HOUR TRKS REQ'D 7-OCT-96 CCS 36 5 O/G PC 6 I/G PC 311.33 OVRL 0 8-OCT-96 CCS 446 22 O/G PC 29.67 I/G PC 440.33 OVRL 15.33 9-OCT-96 CCS 388 20 O/G PC 22.33 I/G PC 402.67 OVRL 4 10-OCT-96 CCS 321.67 18 O/G PC 19 I/G PC 355 OVRL 2 11-OCT-96 CCS 291 16 O/G PC 16.87 I/G PC 369.07 OVRL 4.53 CCS: is a measure of telephone usage. It is expressed in Centrum (hundred) call seconds. There are a maximum of 36 CCS per trunk per hour. To convert CCS to minutes of use, simply divide CCS by 0.6. PC: is peg count and indicates the number of calls completed during the average busy hour. O/G is outgoing. I/G is incoming. OVFL: is overflow and indicates the number of calls that were missed during the average busy hour due to all circuits being in use or busy. Page 2 of the same study has the numbers broken down by date and time (ten 1 hour blocks from 08:00 to 18:00), as follows: 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 8-Oct CCS 216 419 434 485 339 272 253 247 200 96 O.G. 2 26 30 33 32 0 29 0 0 1 I.C. 262 414 428 479 368 321 287 276 217 112 OVFL 0 7 11 28 1 0 2 0 0 0 Oct 7, 9, 10, and 11 are also broken down by these ten hourly analyses. *************************** At first glance, these numbers seem to be pretty straight forward. For example, take the CCS for Oct 8 at the hour beginning 10:00 am. A CCS count of 434 equals 723.3 minutes (434/0.6) of usage. There were 30 outgoing calls, 428 incoming calls, and 11 incoming calls received a busy signal. Am I correct in assuming that the average call duration in this hour was 1.58 minutes? (723 minutes divided by 458 calls) This seems to make sense to me until I look at another study for a rural number which doesn't have much traffic. In the rural example there are many instances where CCS is zero even though there is an incoming and/or an outgoing call count. I don't understand how the telco can report an incoming or outgoing call and yet also report that no time was used. If anyone can help, please email me directly at: langloid@magi.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 11:11:25 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Pay-Per-Use Services (was Re: Sudden New Feature ...) Larry English wrote: > Suddenly a new feature has appeared on my residential phone line. > I noticed that if I'm talking to someone, I can "flash" the hookswitch, > make another call [without disconnecting the first call], and then > either confer with a second caller until they hang up, or I can > flash again and then be talking to both callees. > I haven't signed up for this; I definitely do not have [experiments > proved this] call waiting; I am not doing anything special to make > it happen [like dialing *6x or something]. > Can I get charged for trying/using this? > What is it even called? 3-way calling? Conference calling? > It has also appeared on another phone at a house near me that probably > uses the same central office. > I don't really even want it -- it makes it hard to be sure when you > have really terminated a call, since if you don't hold the hook down > long enough, you might be making an accidental conference call. Larry, you are probably served out of a "digital" office (WECO/Lucent #5ESS or a Nortel DMS) switch, rather than from a WECO/Lucent #1AESS which is not 'digital'. "Per-Use" Three-Way has been available in Louisiana by South Central Bell (now BellSouth) for just over ten years now. For the *longest*, it was only available in #1AESS offices, the non-digital style. From a #1AESS, you can activate it *ONLY* before initiating a call, by dialing *71 (or 1171). This will allow you to 'flash' after the first 'leg' of the call is 'stable', so that you can 'three-way' in a second 'leg' of the call. The charge was about one dollar per call. It could be 'blocked' at the customer's request, if "the kids" were running up a bill! :( If you were in a 'digital' office (#5ESS or DMS), and didn't subscribe to monthly three-way, you were out of luck if you wanted to do a per-use three way. Early this year or late last year, for Louisiana customers, BellSouth began to offer 'per-use' call-return (*69 = 1169) and repeat dial (*66 = 1166), at a cost of 75-cents per use. They also dropped the charge of per-use three-way from $1.00 to 75-cents. *AND* from *digital* offices (#5ESS and DMS), they added per-use three-way, but NOT by *requiring* an initial *71 (1171) to be dialed at the beginning of the entire call setup, but by giving *full flashing privilages* in a stable call! #1AESS 'non-digital' offices still seem to require the use of *71 (1171) prior to placing the call. Blocking or restriction of such per-use features *is* available at no extra cost. But *you*, the customer, must call up BellSouth to 'opt-out'. At least that is how it is in Louisiana, according to La. PSC regulatory tariffs, etc. For most of these 'new' per-use chargeable features, you *can* opt-out and get them blocked/restricted from (POTS) residential or business lines, at no extra charge. At one time, you had to *pay* telco to have PAY-PAY-PAY per call special area code 900 and local prefix 976 blocked from access. But eventually, state and federal regulatory mandated blocking at no extra charge, at the customer's request. Also, the previously unused N11 format three-digit local codes have been used in various parts of BellSouth territory for pay-per-call 'info' lines, provided by a third provider (i.e. your local newspaper or your local cable TV company). In Louisiana, 211 is the code used by the dominant newspaper in each LATA (i.e. the {Times-Picayunne} for the N.O. LATA, the {Morning Advocate} for the Baton Rouge LATA, the {Acadiana Times} for the Lafayette LATA, and the {Shreveport Times} for the Shreveport/Monroe/Alexandria LATA). The call is 50-cents. It *is* blockable from your line at no extra charge, but *you* must call up BellSouth to request blocking. However, BellSouth does block access automatically from its own payphone lines! This includes the 'dial-1 or just say yes' auto-call completion on calls to local (1)-411 directory. From Louisiana, the charge is an extra thirty-one cents each time you use it. I don't know offhand if I can get blocked from my home line, but I don't call local DA that much, and I'd write the number down at the auto-voice-quote, and then hangup. I used to subscribe on a monthy basis to a large number of these 'vertical services', each feature as an individual 'line item' billing charge, but *now* I have BellSouth's *Complete Choice* package, which is a single fixed fee for *all you can stand* of virtually *every* optional service available from your type of serving switch. You can add or delete (mix and match) the features activated on your line, from the entire pool of features available in "Complete Choice" (as long as your switch handles the service), all at a "pay one price". And, depending on your state's tariffs, if capability for a particular 'new' feature is added to your serving switch, you can then add that feature to your line as part of your "Complete Choice" single fixed monthly price. I understand that my serving switch, presently a #1AESS (the "Seabrook" switch in New Orleans, 504-24x) is going to have "Call Waiting Deluxe" later this month. (CWDeluxe is the ADSI-based caller-ID delivery during a CW beep). I don't know if the "Seabrook" switch is being upgraded to a #5ESS (or DMS), or if the ADSI-based features are being loaded into my serving switch, still as a #1AESS. I was told by the Business Office that I can add CWDeluxe to my line, when it is available from my switch, at no extra charge, as this feature is part of the "Complete Choice" package! Of course, I will have to purchase an ADSI type of Caller-ID box, as my current CID-number and name box can't handle CID signal delivery while I am offhook - i.e. ADSI interface. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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: Craig A. Johnson Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 10:59:26 +0000 Subject: WIPO Database Treaty -- Sign-on Letter Pat, Your readers may be interested in this. Craig ===================================================== Interested organizations/companies are invited to sign onto the following letter, which addresses concerns that have been raised regarding a proposed new Treaty concerning access to electronic databases. The Treaty is expected to be discussed at the diplomatic conference in Geneva this December on behalf of the World Intellectual Property Organization. The proposed Treaty grants a new property right to database owners, which does not incorporate a public "fair use" doctrine, or other traditional copyright conventions. Recent analyses of the Treaty by Jamie Love of the Consumer Project on Technology indicates that the Treaty will create a new property right in facts and other data now in the public domain. It would, for example, significantly change the way sports statistics are controlled and disseminated, and also impact the way that stock prices, weather data, train schedules, data from AIDS research and other facts are used and controlled. Jamie writes: The treaty seeks, for the first time, to permit firms to "own" facts they gather, and to restrict and control the redissemination of those facts. The new property right would lie outside (and on top) of the copyright laws, and create an entirely new and untested form of regulation that would radically change the public's current rights to use and disseminate facts and statistics. American University Law Professor Peter Jaszi recently said the treaty represents "the end of the public domain." Copies of the proposed treaty, a federal register notice asking for public comment, and independent commentary can be found at: http://www.public-domain.org/database/database.html Details and analyses on the Treaty can be found on the Web at: http://www.public-domain.org, and CPT's "primer" on the treay and analysis of the impact on sports statistics is available at: http://www.essential.org/cpt/ip/wipo-sports.html Copyright experts J.H. Reichman and Pamela Samuelson say it is the "least balanced and most potentially anti-competitive intellectual property rights ever created." [http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/reisamda.html] Organizations that wish to sign onto this letter should contact Susan Evoy at CPSR, evoy@cpsr.org. Comments on the Treaty are due by Nov. 22, so signatures are requested as soon as possible. ------------------------------------ Commissioner Bruce Lehman Patent and Trademark Office U.S. Department of Commerce Dear Commisioner Lehman: We, the undersigned organizations, are writing to express our concern over the "Draft Treaty in Respect to Databases" to be discussed at the diplomatic conference in Geneva this December on behalf of the World Intellectual Property Organization (the "Treaty"). The proposed Treaty grants a new sui generis property right, which does not incorporate a public "fair use" doctrine, or other traditional copyright conventions. If enacted as proposed, the Treaty will do violence to the long-established practice in the academic and scientific communities of sharing information for educational and research purposes and will commercialize certain information that is and has always been freely available. Section 1.03 of the proposed Treaty claims that current technology allows databases to be reproduced at "practically no cost." This is not true. An online database is a complex system with much underlying structure that the user never sees. Accessing or copying large portions of the database at minimal or no cost is simply not feasible. But, the proposed Treaty would make the use of databases by the public or scientific and research communities even more prohibitive by permitting database owners or vendors to arbitrarily determine what portion of a database can be extracted, used, or reused. Section 1.04 of the proposed Treaty argues that the originality requirement of U.S. Copyright law does not provide sufficient protection for database producers. This statement is curious in light of a long U.S. legal tradition protecting free speech and authorship on the grounds that facts cannot be copyrighted or otherwise removed from the public domain. By creating a new property right for facts, the Treaty will impose regulations on the use of facts -- an idea that flies in the face of American history and values. The twin dangers are that we will now have to pay to buy collections of "facts" in the public domain, which we did not have to pay for before and that monopolies will be sanctioned and created by the Treaty. In other words, the Treaty strikes down "fair use" and extends sui generis protections to public and private collections. Section 1.04 becomes increasingly incomprehensible in light of the Section 10.05 proposal that "Contracting Parties may design the exact field of application of the provisions envisaged in this Article taking into consideration the need to avoid legislation that would impede lawful practices and the lawful use of subject matter that is in the public domain." In order to implement the spirit of Section 10.05, Section 1.04 and its progeny must be discarded. Consider the numerous categories of public information for which only one practical and/or cost effective information source exists. The practical result of the Treaty will be to create commercial monopolies on these public information sources. Examples include telephone directory information, weather data, "official" sports statistics, government data administered under private contracts (such as the Official Airline Guide data) and other similar public information. It is shocking that the United States Government is seriously considering supporting a proposal that will operate to maximize profits to a small number of database vendors at the expense of the public at large without first undertaking a careful domestic review of these concerns. We urge you to examine this issue through Congressional hearings and other meaningful public discussion. Sincerely, Marcy J. Gordon, Esq. 66 Pearl Street #307 New York, NY 10004-2443660 (212)514-9514 mgordon@pipeline.com On behalf of the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Audrie Krause Executive Director NetAction 601 Van Ness Avenue, No. 631 San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 775-8674 akrause@igc.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Nov 96 11:40 EST From: James E Bellaire Subject: 765 Approved For Indiana Relief The following story was on WRTV 6 Indianapolis on Wednesday, November 13th. (Transcript from www.wrtv.com - from the 6pm news) [AREACODE] STARTING FEBRUARY FIRST CENTRAL INDIANA WILL BE SPLIT INTO TWO TELEPHONE AREA CODES. REGULATORS APPROVED THE MOVE TODAY. UNDER THE PLAN, MARION AND PARTS OF THE SURROUNDING COUNTIES REMAIN UNDER 317. BUT AREAS FURTHER OUT WILL SWITCH TO THE NEW 765 AREA CODE. THE CHANGE IS NEEDED BECAUSE OF THE EXPLOSION IN NEW PHONES LIKE CELLULAR AND FAX MACHINES. THE AREA HAS SIMPLY RUN OUT OF NUMBERS. THE COMMISSION DID APPROVE ONE MAJOR CHANGE. SHELBYVILLE WILL STAY 317 INSTEAD OF BEING SWITCHED TO THE NEW CODE. The 11 o'clock had interviews with residents of Shelbyville who were glad to stay in 317. Community leaders had complained because they wanted to keep their economic ties to Indianapolis. (The 11pm transcript was not available.) The map shown on screen now shows Manilla, Shelbyville, and Waldron left in 317. Other 765 Information: Bellcore has had its 765 page up for a while, with a test number of 1-765-281-6988 announced. 317-281 is currently Muncie Indiana (281-6988 is a non-working number). Ameritech has not put the change on their site yet. But they did put it in their Business to Business phone book for central Indiana. The PUC was not to happy with them for publishing before it was approved, but the next edition of the book will not be out until after permissive has ended next June. It looks like Ameritech made the right move (although Shelbyville is probably in the wrong code in that book). My unofficial summary based on maps displayed on TV and newspapers: Indiana Cities to stay in 317: INDIANAPOLIS and all cities Indy residents may dial as local: Acton, Bargersville, Brownsburg, Carmel, Clayton, Danville, Fairland, Fishers, Fortville, Franklin, Greenfield, Greenwood, Lizton, Maxwell, Mc Cordsville, Monrovia, Mooresville, New Palestine, Noblesville, Oaklandon, Pittsboro, Plainfield, Trafalgar, West Newton, Westfield, Whiteland, Whitestown, Zionsville. Other Exchanges Staying in 317 Manilla, Marietta, Nineveh, Shelbyville, Sheridan, Waldron. All other cities in 317 will move to the new 765 code. (Including Eminence, Martinsville, Paragon.) James E. Bellaire bellaire@tk.com Webpage Available 23.5 Hrs a Day!!! http://www.iquest.net/~bellaire/ ------------------------------ From: prvtctzn@aol.com Subject: Re: Brokerages Fined / Many Are Called - You May Collect Date: 14 Nov 1996 17:10:49 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) writes: > Brokerages Pay Fine for Dialing Florida 'No Call' Listings > Nov. 11--Four big brokerage firms landed in hot water with the > state for making cold calls to Floridians on the "no sales > solicitation calls" list. > Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., Paine Webber Inc. > and Smith Barney Inc. agreed to pay a combined $33,000 fine and > to improve marketing procedures under a settlement announced > Thursday with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer > Services. > Florida law prohibits businesses from making unsolicited calls to > the 40,000 people who are on the state's "no call" list. Companies > that use telemarketing are supposed to purchase the list and > check it before placing calls. > Agriculture Commissioner Bob Crawford said the brokerage firms > ran into trouble partly because of recent changes in Florida area > codes. He said the companies apologized for their mistakes. The above article tells of Florida's move against investment firms, including Paine Webber. I have recently been involved with Paine Webber concerning their violation of *Federal* telemarketing regulations concerning one of our members. To assist others who wish to file an action against Paine Webber, I will freely supply a notorized affidavit. (send SASE to Private Citizen, Inc - PO Box 233 - Naperville, IL 60566; with a note "Paine Weber Affidavit", and a copy of your complaint). The following explains the pertinant circumstances of the violation: If you were solicited at home by a Paine Webber representative, between December 22, 1992 and October 1, 1996 you may be able to collect up to $1,500 from them for violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA). Note that the TCPA requires firms making commercial solicitations to residents, to have a `Do-Not-Call' Policy, available upon demand, before they can make such calls. Pursuant to my discussions with Paine Weber management, they have acknowledged that such a Policy was not `available upon demand' until October 1996.. Thus, each tlemarketing call they made to you at home, within the time-frame mentioned above, would likely afford you a cause of action in your state small claims court for $500. (Pursuant to the TCPA, the judge has discretion to award triple damages [$1,500] if the violation is willful or knowing) The affidavit I am making available may assist in showing that `willfullness' and thus allow the possibility of collecting $1,500. For more information about the TCPA see: http://www.russ-smith.com Bob Bulmash Private Citizen, Inc. http://webmill.com/pci/home http://webmill.com/prvtctzn/home ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #615 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 14 22:38:24 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA16364; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 22:38:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 22:38:24 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611150338.WAA16364@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #616 TELECOM Digest Thu, 14 Nov 96 22:38:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 616 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CFP: IDMS'97 - Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems,Telecom (L Wolf) Pin 800 Numbers (was Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service) (K. Brown) Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN (Dale Neiburg) Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA (Nils Andersson) Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA (James L. Olds) Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA (Henry Baker) Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers (Martin Baines) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Times (Wes Leatherock) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: lars@kom.e-technik.th-darmstadt.de (Lars Wolf) Subject: CFP: IDMS'97 - Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems, Telecom Date: 14 Nov 1996 14:53:17 GMT Organization: TH Darmstadt, KOM Dear Colleague, Please find enclosed a Call for Papers for IDMS'97 to be held September 10-12, 1997 in Darmstadt, Germany. Best regards, Lars CALL FOR PAPERS European Workshop on Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems and Telecommunication Services (IDMS'97) 10. - 12. September 1997 Darmstadt, Germany In Cooperation with ACM SIGMM Gesellschaft fuer Informatik GMD IEEE Computer Society VDE ITG This Fourth International Workshop on Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems and Telecommunication Services follows the successful IDMS workshop held 1996 in Berlin. The purpose of this workshop is to provide a forum for the presentation, exploration and discussion of technologies and their advancements in the broad field of interactive distributed multimedia systems -- from basic system technologies such as networking and operating system support to all kinds of multimedia applications. Furthermore, we are also looking for work from related areas, including digital library, mobile communication, VR, and software agents. Case studies and papers describing experimental work are especially welcome. Relevant topics include, but are not limited to: * High-speed and multimedia networks * ATM networks and applications * Mobile multimedia systems * Multimedia communication protocols * Compression algorithms * Quality of service and media scaling * Resource management * Multimedia operating systems * Synchronization * Multimedia database and storage * Video-on-demand systems, components and architectures * Multimedia programming languages, abstractions & APIs * Development tools for distributed multimedia applications * Multimedia-specific intelligent agents * Multimedia/hypermedia applications and tools, production and authoring * Conferencing * Computer supported collaborative work * Digital libraries * Interactive television * Virtual reality systems IDMS'97 will consist of one day of tutorials and two days of technical presentations in an envisaged single-track. System and tool demonstrations will be possible throughout the workshop. In order to keep the flavor of a "workshop", participation will be restricted to about 100 participants. The proceedings of the workshop will be published in the Springer LNCS series and will be available during the workshop. Selected papers will be forwarded to a special issue of the "Computer Communications" Journal. Information for Authors ======================= The working language of the workshop is English. The submission process of papers will be handled electronically. Detailed description of the electronic submission procedures are available in the IDMS'97 web page http://www.th-darmstadt.de/idms97/ Authors without web access may send mailto: idms97@KOM.th-darmstadt.de requesting electronic submission information. Authors unable to submit electronically are invited to send 5 copies of their full paper to the program chair: Lars C. Wolf Dept. of Electrical Engineering & Information Technology Darmstadt University of Technology Merckstr. 25, D-64283 Darmstadt, Germany Manuscripts Submitted manuscripts must describe original work (not submitted or published elsewhere). The manuscripts must be no longer than 5000 words (including references, tables, etc.), be typed double-spaced, contain an abstract of approximately 300 words, and include title, authors and affiliations. The author who serves as contact person must be marked appropriately. Panels ------ Suggestions for panels which present innovative, controversial, or otherwise interesting ideas are welcome. Send a panel proposal of at most 3 pages including a biographical sketch of the panelist to the general chair. Important Dates =============== Submissions due: 01. March 1997 Notification of acceptance: 15. May 1997 Camera-ready version due: 15. June 1997 General Chair ============= Ralf Steinmetz, Darmstadt U., Germany Email: Ralf.Steinmetz@KOM.th-darmstadt.de Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology Darmstadt University of Technology Merckstr. 25, D-64283 Darmstadt, Germany Fax: +49 6151 166152 Program Committee ================= B. Butscher, DeTeBerkom, Germany A. Danthine, U. Liege, Belgium L. Delgrossi, Andersen Consulting, France J. Eberspaecher, TU Munich, Germany W. Effelsberg, U. Mannheim, Germany J. Encarnacao, FhG-IGD, Germany D. Ferrari, U. Cattolica, Italy B. Furht, Florida Atlantic U., USA N. Georganas, U. Ottawa, Canada R.G. Herrtwich, RWE, Germany A. Hopper, U. Cambridge / ORL, UK J.P. Hubaux, EPFL, Switzerland D. Hutchison, Lancaster U., UK Y. Ip, Siemens AG, Germany W. Kalfa, TU Chemnitz, Germany T.D.C. Little, Boston U., USA F. Mattern, Darmstadt U., Germany E. Moeller, GMD FOKUS, Germany K. Nahrstedt, U. Illinois, USA E. Neuhold, GMD IPSI, Germany S. Pink, SICS, Sweden R. Popescu-Zeletin, TU Berlin, Germany V. Rangan, U. California, USA K. Rothermel, U. Stuttgart, Germany J. Schweitzer, Siemens AG, Germany H. Tokuda, Keio U., Japan F. Williams, Ericsson, Germany L. Wolf, Darmstadt U., Germany (Chair) General Information =================== For program information contact the Program Chair. For additional information see World-Wide Web: http://www.th-darmstadt.de/idms97 Local Organization ================== For any details on transportation, accomodation, or any other local arrangements please contact Martin Karsten Email: Martin.Karsten@KOM.th-darmstadt.de (same address as general chair) ------------------------------ From: Keith Brown Subject: Pin 800 Numbers (was Re: MCI One Breaks its 800 Number Service) Date: 14 Nov 1996 14:31:26 GMT Organization: CallCom International Linc Madison wrote in article : > In article , PAT added: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A lot of the carriers are now including >> a provision in their contract which says you agree that when you give >> up their service you give up your right to the number as well, or any >> right to transfer it to a different carrier. PAT] > Isn't that FLAGRANTLY illegal? That should be a nice court case for > some lawyer who salivates at the mention of "punitive damages"! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think it is legal if you agree to it > as part of a contract. If there was no contract and later on you > wished to change carriers and keep the number, they would be unable > to stop you. What I have head is that a lot of people did just that: > they got a 'good number' from one carrier then carted it off to > another carrier. The first carrier tried to stop it only to have their > efforts to 'save their number' thwarted. So now they specifically > make it part of their contract; it becomes a matter of contract law > rather than tariff or FCC regulation, etc. PAT] Pat: This is especially true for anyone thinking of obtaining or currently has a "pin" 800 number (an 800 number that will only connect after a certain number of extra digits "pin" have been added). The reason of course is that thousands of other customers may have the same 800 number, but with a different "pin". I had a gal in Texas call me yesterday (an Excel Rep using MCI) wanting to do just that, until she mentioned that it was a "pin" 800 number. So she decided to obtain a new 888 number instead. Pin 800 numbers tend to offer a higher cost per minute than the usual $0.109 to $0.129 (interstate rate) 800/888 service. 800/888 Service has a lot of features that customers are usually not informed about because of the additional set-up charges or paperwork that has to be submitted. For example; you can block your 800/888 number from certain area codes or regions (thus eliminating unwanted calls from those areas), establish time of day routing (800/888 number will ring in to one phone number, and then ring in to yet another phone number after a designated time period ie. say after 6:00 pm rings in to a phone number in another state). Keith Brown CallCom International URL: http://www.callcom.com ------------------------------ From: Dale Neiburg Subject: Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN Date: Thu, 14 Nov 96 14:54:00 PST In TELECOM Digest V16 #598, Tad Cook sent in a news item that read in part: > Area-Code Plan Would Divide Tennessee Town > By Cree Lawson, Nashville Banner, Tenn. > Nov. 5--Life in Spring Hill -- already complicated because the town > straddles Williamson and Maury counties -- will get even more complex > if a new area code splits the community. > A plan released by the Tennessee Telecommunications Association would > give Maury and much of the rest of the Midstate a new 931 area > code. Ten counties -- Williamson, Cannon, Cheatham, Davidson, DeKalb, > Dickson, Robertson, Rutherford, Sumner and Wilson -- would keep the > 615 area code. > That means that by 1999, Spring Hill residents would have to dial 10 > digits and pay long-distance charges just to call across town. > "Hopefully, they can work something out because that would just be > ridiculous," says Spring Hill Mayor Ron Hankins. According to my Rand McNally atlas, Spring Hill has a population of less than 1100. Do they really have two COs? I live in Laurel, MD, with a much larger population. Three counties (Prince Georges, Howard, and Anne Arundel) meet in the middle of Laurel; and a fourth (Montgomery) comes doggone close. Now, I live in Howard County, which would normally be in NPA 410. But since we get our service from the Laurel CO in Prince Georges County (NPA 301), our phone number is 301-NXX-XXXX. As far as telco is concerned, our phone is in PG County ... since that's where its card is. Why wouldn't the same approach be used in Spring Hill? Dale A. Neiburg dneiburg@npr.org ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA Date: 14 Nov 1996 20:30:09 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Lloyd Matthews writes: > Also, PacBell flacks don't seem to have any clue about their PCS > service. Does anyone know if it will be GSM and compatible with my > Ericsson phone, and when it will be rolled out throughout California? Pac Bell is operating 1900MHz PCS/GSM-style in San Diego. They say they will have it in the rest of So Cal by early 1997. Note that the Sprint PCS/GSM in DC is incompatible with the rest of Sprint PCS which uses CDMA, but should be compatible with PacBell. Another question is whether they have a roaming agreement yet, ask them. Let us all know the results. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: James L. Olds Subject: Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA Date: 14 Nov 1996 23:43:01 GMT Organization: Krasnow Institute for Advanced Studies Loyd ... I am currently doing some research into this area ... and I'm not ready to be definitive ... but it does look like the PCS favor that Sprint has in DC/Baltimore is *incompatible* with the PCS flavor they intend to roll out in other cities. Obviously, that's quite a news story in the making and so they are quite right to be waffling on the issue. Cheers, James L. Olds Ph.D. Executive Director, American Association of Anatomists internet:olds@anatomy.org http://www.intr.net/olds ------------------------------ From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) Subject: Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 18:31:07 GMT In article , lloydm@pop.svl.trw. com wrote: > I do business in DC and California, and recently got a Sprint Spectrum > PCS phone (which currently works only in DC/Baltimore) under the > impression that it would be "nationwide by the end of1996." Whenever > I call to confirm this, Sprint refers me to some marketing flack or > other who all seem to have the party line of "everything will be up > sometime in 1997, maybe". Each PCS metropolitan area seems to be its > own city-state running its own show on its own schedule, and Sprint HQ > in Kansas City doesn't have any sort of summary. Can anyone tell me > how to get Sprint's actual plan for service throughout California? > Also, PacBell flacks don't seem to have any clue about their PCS > service. Does anyone know if it will be GSM and compatible with my > Ericsson phone, and when it will be rolled out throughout California? I believe that the DC/Baltimore system is a GSM system, while the rest of the Sprint Spectrum system will be CDMA. Your best nearterm bet in California will be PacBell Mobile, which already has their GSM system operational in San Diego. I believe that BellSouth will also have GSM in some of its areas. http://www.pacbell.mobile.com/ http://www.pactel.com/about/pcs_faq.html http://www.gsmworld.com/ http://www.bellsouthdcs.com/gsmfacts.html http://www.supercall.co.za/gsm/index.html http://www.supercall.co.za/gsm/gsm_sites.html http://www.ericsson.se/WN/wn1-96/two.html Also, contact "GSM North America": (510) 227-3000 (703) 799-7383 ------------------------------ From: Martin Baines Subject: Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 17:02:21 +0000 Organization: Silicon Graphics [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > This comes from the 'I feel like such a fool' department: One night > I was walking downtown past an ATM built in the wall on the front > of a building and it was going beep-beep-beep. I stopped to look and > a message on the screen said 'Do you need more time to make your > selection?'. The selections were to make a deposit, make a withdrawal, > check 'my' balance, etc. Some fool had walked away without terminating > his session ... still logged in. So what did this fool do? Instead of > saying yes, give me another minute or so, I said 'no' ... and the ATM > terminated the session and tossed 'my' card back out to me. Oh dear ... > that was not the desired results, and not having a PIN to go with the > card in question didn't help any. Had I said 'yes' the machine would > have waited on me patiently while I cleaned out the rest of the poor > guy's account. Put it down as a RISK of using ATM's I guess; do not > forget to terminate the session and take your card with you, otherwise > the next person to walk up may be more nimble with those buttons and > have more presence of mind than I did at the unexpected sight of a > treasure drove there for the looting. I have noticed that all of the ATM's in the UK use a simple algorithm to minimise this risk: they give don't give you any money until the very end of the transaction i.e. after they have given you your card back. As most people know not leave until they get their money not many fall into the trap. Of course if all you do is check your account, you could still run into the problem. It rather threw me when I used an ATM in the US, and it ejected money, without giving me the card back. I had got so used to the normal way in the UK it felt wrong. On the subject of different VISA cards: debit vs credit cards, my reading of the VISA contract is that if a vendor displays the VISA logo, they are required to honour *all* VISA transactions regardless of type of card or issuer (subject of course to security validation). I once had a petrol station in France refuse to take my VISA card, as it had a mag strip, rather than being a French style smartcard. I dug my heals in, phoned my issuer (on a mobile phone for the obligatory telecom reference) and gave them hell. They phoned the bank in Franch who would clear the transaction and got them to talk to the service station. In the end they accepted my card -- someone had to hand write a paper slip as they had lost their old fashioned swiper, and I don't think it exactly promoted Anglo-French relations, but it did work! My advice, if you have time create hell until they take your card! Martin Baines - Telecommunications Market Consultant Silicon Graphics, Arlington Business Park, Reading, RG7 4SB, UK email: martinb@reading.sgi.com SGI vmail: 6-788-7842 phone: +44 118 925 7842 fax: +44 118 925 7545 URL: http://reality.sgi.com/martinb_reading/ Silicon Surf: http://www.sgi.com/International/UK/ ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 01:22:36 GMT Organization: Hotel California BBS spinal@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Clayton Walker) wrote: > I can't tell you how much it aggravates me when people come to me, the > resident computer nerd at my school, and ask how they get on the > Internet from their computer at home. I ask, "What Internet Service > Provider do you use?" They reply, cheerfully, "America Online." And > I say, in a most curteous voice, "Well, to get on the Internet you > need an Internet Service Provider." "But I told you, I have AOL!" > "Well, to get on the Internet you need an Internet Service Provider." > Sometimes, some of the more dense of them will keep at that for > several times, until they walk off, bewildered. This year alone, I've > had to hang up on three different guys from my school on multiple > occasions, late at night, who call me asking how to download and I > quote, "Nudies of that Jenny McCarty chick on MTV." And I > wonder sometimes why we've been labeled Generation X, the no-good > slackers associated with that no-good smutfest called the Internet. > Perhaps in five years the trend will have passed, and we can have our > old Internet back, where Netscape Navigator and AOL are simply > memories. I've got to say that this attitude (which is certainly not limited to Clayton) is perhaps the biggest reason that computer support -- particularly in-house computer support -- has (often deservedly) gotten such a bad name. As a sort of a sub-computer nerd for my group, I had to learn a great deal of what I needed to know -- and what my users needed to know -- in _spite_ of the so-called support. (Certainly there are exceptions; those are often the folks who pointed me in the right direction to learn something.) Computer support folks have a great deal of knowledge, and it is somewhat puzzling that, given their role, they use this to demean and intimidate users rather than try to help them. Instead of telling them repeatedly they need an ISP, for example, explain to them what AOL is not and why they need something different. I first started using a computer for word processing. I was, I think, pretty proficient on both a typewriter and a teletypewriter. But there is no way I ever though I would understand all the cams and linkages and springs that go into a typewriter. Why would I, or my users, need to know all the esoteric things that computer support people know? It is not something that has ever been part of their experience, and for many people is a violent impediment to the use of their computer, since so much of the documentation and support is put out from the viewpoint of the machine and/or system. Sure, some people get interested in computers and how they work, but this is no more a part of using a computer successfully to perform tasks -- whether word processing or surfing the Internet -- that are useful in and of themselves. There are certainly a lot of computer nerds out there that resent what has happened to "their Internet" now that other than nerds can make use of it. (And, again, I don't mean to single Clayton out, since it's a very common attitude among many people.) Clayton just articulated it very well (and that is commendable; too many posts are so poorly written it's hard to make out what the writer intended). Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.11 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can see both sides of this and have to say that while I agree with you for the most part, there are times it gets to be ridiculous. I am not just talking about the people who want to know where to find the 'any' key on their keyboard they are supposed to press. I love helping new people get started netting; I don't think much else gives me the pleasure I get from seeing someone become as enthusiastic about computers as I was fifteen years ago. One moderator of a very popular e-zine on the net -- William Pfieffer -- initially learned everything he knew about computers from me. Still, there are times it becomes just so oppressive and backlogged with so much to do in so little time. I get letters from people intended for the Digest who ask questions about things that have been covered here a dozen times in the past dozen years; they want to start the same old threads over again, having never checked any archives, any FAQ, any web pages, etc. Yeah, I love helping the new guys get started, but sometimes I just get a massive headache from it all. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #616 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Nov 14 23:40:04 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA22343; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 23:40:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 23:40:04 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611150440.XAA22343@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #617 TELECOM Digest Thu, 14 Nov 96 23:40:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 617 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Peter Carless) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (John R. Grout) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Bruce Waldman) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Danny Bateman) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Ed Ellers) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Nils Andersson) Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA (Marty Bose) Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! (David Clayton) Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! (Nils Andersson) Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs (Gerry Moersdorf) Re: Brokerages Fined for Dialing No Call Lists (Robert Bulmash) Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming (Poll Dubh) Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming (John R. Levine) Last Laugh! You Have Been Spammed (Thomas Kroll) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Peter Carless Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: 15 Nov 1996 03:37:00 GMT Organization: CADVision Development Corp. Dale Kramer wrote in article : > Is there a service that I can use that allows me (in Canada) to call a > toll number in the US and then get tied into a line that lets me call > an 800 number that can not be normally dialed from Canada? Is there > any way at all possible to call a US 800 number from Canada? > Dale Kramer kci@vaxxine.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't we have something here not too > long ago about a special three digit code used by some telco in > Canada for just this purpose? Perhaps someone could contact Mr. Kramer > with details. PAT] The telco in Canada that was offering the service (for a fee) was BCTel which only operates in the province of British Columbia. From Dale's email address it appears that he lives in the province of Ontario, so this would be of little use to him. One possible solution is a service called Net2Phone. This service allows you to call regular telephone numbers from your PC through the Internet using a microphone and sound card. The company does charge for this service but allows you to call 1-800 numbers free of charge. I did try it, and was able to connect with 800 numbers that were unavailable from Canada, but I found the connection so bad as to be all but useless. You may have a better connection to the Internet and get better results. If you want to explore it further their website is at http://www.net2phone.com/ . ------------------------------ From: grout@sp55.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: 14 Nov 1996 06:38:59 -0600 Organization: Center for Supercomputing R and D, UIUC In article nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) writes: > In article , Ian Angus > writes: >> It's even worse in other parts of the world -- it's astounding how >> many computer companies, for example, run ads which are seen world >> wide, with no method of contact except a US-only 800 or 888 number. > Right On!!!! > The simplest solution for non-NANP countries would be to allow 800 calls, > and charge for them. Being that they are preceded with a country code, > there should be no confusion. As has been pointed out before on c.d.t, but not recently, 800/888 numbers have different properties than regular phone numbers. 1. An 800 number can have limited coverage within the USA (a frequent situation) and so could be assigned to different customers in different parts of the USA (I have no figures about how often this happens). 2. An 800 number can forward calls to different offices in different parts of the USA ... the Internal Revenue Service does this, and so does my insurance company, Amica. 3. AT&T pioneered a service which reroutes 800 calls to use cheaper services (e.g., intra-LATA or local) when possible (many national advertisers used to exclude the state in which they operated their 800 service from their national 800 number's coverage pattern to avoid extra toll charges) ... I don't know if the other IXC's offer similar things. John R. Grout Center for Supercomputing R & D j-grout@uiuc.edu Coordinated Science Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ From: bwaldman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Bruce Waldman) Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: 14 Nov 1996 05:48:38 -0700 Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. In article , Dale Kramer wrote: > Is there a service that I can use that allows me (in Canada) to call a > toll number in the US and then get tied into a line that lets me call > an 800 number that can not be normally dialed from Canada? Is there > any way at all possible to call a US 800 number from Canada? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't we have something here not too > long ago about a special three digit code used by some telco in > Canada for just this purpose? Perhaps someone could contact Mr. Kramer > with details. PAT] We have a special prefix in New Zealand to reach USA 800 numbers through Telecom NZ. However it is much cheaper and more efficient to use a USA callback service. Dale might want to try one with Canadian 800 access. He would dial through to the switch in the USA and then enter the USA 800 number. I can provide details as to a supplier. Worked fine for me when I was visiting Montreal last summer, and it was cheaper than a local call from the payphone. Bruce Waldman bwaldman@nyx.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 12:48:38 IST From: Danny Bateman Reply-To: Danny.Bateman@telrad.co.il Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Bezek, the local PTT here in Israel, and until next year, the only long distance (i.e. overseas) provider, allows you to call an 800 number in the US by dialing area code 880 instead. When you call an 800 number in country code 1 (00-1-800-xxx-xxxx) you get a recording stating that you can call an 800 number by using the 880 code instead, at normal call rates to the US. When calling an 800 number with this 880 area code, the following message is heard before it rings: "Access to the number you have dialed is not free of charge outside the US, If answered, you will be charged international direct dialing rates for this call. If you do not want to proceed with this call please hang up now." I don't know how they are going to support the same service for 888 numbers, and what happens if area code 880 is assigned? Danny Bateman Telrad Telecommunications M1 S/W Department Danny.Bateman@telrad.co.il Phone: +972-8-927-3408 Fax: +972-8-927-3487 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think 880 will be assigned. I believe I read here in the Digest (possibly something from Mark Cuccia) saying that 880 was among the 88x codes being reserved? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: Wed, 13 Nov 96 10:24:54 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't we have something here not too > long ago about a special three digit code used by some telco in > Canada for just this purpose? Perhaps someone could contact Mr. Kramer > with details. PAT] Something's being ignored here -- many 800 numbers are either available only in certain regions or are directed to different locations depending on where the call comes from. If the customer that has the 800/888 number doesn't want calls from outside a certain area, should callers from outside the U.S. be able to get around this? And if the 800/888 customer has only defined calling regions within the U.S., where should foreign calls be directed? ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: 13 Nov 1996 17:27:21 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) Either this group or the ... tech group had a discussion. Candidates for use are 880 and 881 (or is it 881 and 882) for 800 and 888 respectively. It is unclear to me if they work, and from where. There is a report about 700, but it _should_not_work_. Another possibility is to use an AT&T access line and an AT&T or local telco credit card (Canadian might be OK, I do not know). Try it all and let us know what works. Sample number to call: 800-223 6177, GTE billing in California. Regards (and awaiting results with baited breath) Nils Andersson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 04:08:08 -0700 From: Marty Bose Subject: Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA > I do business in DC and California, and recently got a Sprint Spectrum > PCS phone (which currently works only in DC/Baltimore) under the > impression that it would be "nationwide by the end of1996." Whenever > I call to confirm this, Sprint refers me to some marketing flack or > other who all seem to have the party line of "everything will be up > sometime in 1997, maybe". Each PCS metropolitan area seems to be its > own city-state running its own show on its own schedule, and Sprint HQ > in Kansas City doesn't have any sort of summary. Can anyone tell me > how to get Sprint's actual plan for service throughout California? The good news is that most of California will be covered by Sprint PCS by mid 1997; the bad news is that your phone won't work on Sprint's system, since everywhere but the DC area will be CDMA, not GSM. At Sprint PCS's press briefing at PCS `96 there was a mention of eventually converting the DC system over to CDMA, but no timeframe was defined. PBMS's system will be GSM, but they will be (probably) be coming up later than Sprint PCS, and haven't announced their position on roaming. Marty Bose ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 07:52:23 GMT Organization: Customer of Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia Monty Solomon contributed the following: > After a few of these unexplained crashes, one of our MIS group noticed > that every time he went in to the server room to reboot the dead > servers, one of the AT&T engineers was using his mobile phone. So, > they were asked to turn their phones off while working in the server > room, and the problem has not reoccurred. > To test the theory a bit further, the MIS group then took an otherwise > unused server, and experimented with using a mobile phone near > it. With the working phone being used less than a foot away from the > machine, they provoked a crash which corrupted the system disk (and > its mirror volume) beyond repair. My GSM phone used to work really well at moving the serial mouse connected to my laptop whenever it was transmitting; it didn't crash it though. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! Date: 14 Nov 1996 20:30:06 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Monty Solomon writes: > To test the theory a bit further, the MIS group then took an otherwise > unused server, and experimented with using a mobile phone near > it. With the working phone being used less than a foot away from the > machine, they provoked a crash which corrupted the system disk (and > its mirror volume) beyond repair. This just illustrates what a lot of us already know: The GSM phones put out crazy amounts of EM-noise. I do not know why; my US style D-AMPS is not _nearly_ as bad as my Euro-GSM phone. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: Gerry Moersdorf Subject: Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 14:57:35 -0500 Organization: Applied Innovation Inc. Reply-To: gerry@aiinet.com Craig Partridge wrote: > Joe Jensen writes: >> The long hold time associated with Internet access is a REAL problem. >> To understand why, you need to understand that the switch is >> engineered to support specified concentration ratio across the central >> office, typically somewhere between 4:1 to 8:1. > An important detail here. How sacred is that ratio? My understanding > is that it varies. And in a world where 1 Gb/s data paths are > commonplace in boxes and depreciation cycles are going down sharply (I > think PACBELL said they're now using five or seven years?), just how > horribly expensive is it to upgrade? The current network is build a 64kb funnel called a class 5 office switch, these systems the Lucent 5ESS and Nortel DMS100 proviide the majority of dailtone here in north america, these systems were never designed for data or broadband services and sit between the users (the loops) and that vast unharnessed optical interoffice capacity. These machines must be bypassed for the problem to go away. Telcos realize this and do not want to continue to over build the current switched class 5 system, they want to invest in ATM. Gerry Moersdorf, President/CEO Applied Innovation INC 5800 Innovation Dr, Dublin OH 800-247-9482 ------------------------------ From: prvtctzn@aol.com Subject: Re: Brokerages Fined for Dialing No Call Lists Date: 14 Nov 1996 17:30:35 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , chrissv@cat.com (Steven V. Christensen) writes: > In article in comp.dcom.telecom, > Tad Cook (tad@ssc.com) wrote: >> Brokerages Pay Fine for Dialing Florida 'No Call' Listings >> By Helen Huntley, St. Petersburg Times, Fla. >> Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News >> Nov. 11--Four big brokerage firms landed in hot water with the state >> for making cold calls to Floridians on the "no sales solicitation >> calls" list. >> Residential numbers can be placed on the list for a $10 enrollment fee >> and a $5 annual renewal fee. For information call (800) 435-7352. > How does this list differ from the list that phone solicitors are > supposed to have, which you can be added by simply asking, > "Place me on your 'do not call' list" ? Telenuuisance firms (excluding newspapers) who call Florida residents must first get a copy of the state's no-call list, and purge the numbers thereon from their call lists. The function of the Florida list is thus to notify junk callers, before they call, not to call those who are on the no-call list. Florida's no-call list is somewhat like the service offered by Private Citizen, Inc. on a nationwide basis. It does not require you to notify telemarketers individually, but rather collectively, not to bother you, Before They Call. Bob Bulmash Private Citizen, inc. http:/webmill.com/pci/home http://webmill.com/prvtctzn/home ------------------------------ From: singular@oort.ap.sissa.it (Poll Dubh) Subject: Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming Date: 14 Nov 1996 16:56:53 GMT Organization: Lasciate ogni speranza voi ch'entrate In article , John R Levine wrote: > operating out of a mail drop in Bellevue, Washington. I found that > adjusting my router to discard any packets coming from their network > 207.14.56 improved my quality of life. Did the same thing. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Instead of disgarding their packets, > shouldn't you be returning their packets to them, with a few packets > of your own saying in effect 'mail from your site is not welecome here' > or words to that effect. As it stands now, they are just assuming the > users at your site are not interested in the current spam offering and > they will continue to send various offerings. Why not be frank and > upfront with them about it? You can still automate the process and > not have to examine it all when it comes in. No, that's too much work and might be frowned upon as a violation of the Internet Protocol (or a router malfunction/misconfiguration, if you wish). Discarding the packets has the following advantages: -- minimizes work for *your* system (you won't even know they exist[*], other than through news reports); -- clogs up the queue at the sender's end (because all that machine sees is a "host unreachable" condition, which is usually considered a transient failure (unlike "no such domain") for which it is proper to wait a while and try again). [*] Actually, the router collects statistics on the packets it turns down. Since the last reboot, I got 12 packets from 207.14.56.*, 5 from 207.149.8.*, 13 from 38.*.*.* (that's PSI/Interramp, also contributing to my quality of life by being locked out of here). I can live with that kind of load. The only potential drawback is if the IP addresses get reassigned to a site you may want to correspond with. I've brought that to the attention of the people at SprintLink, telling them to be careful what uses these "tainted" addresses are put to in the future. Come to think of it, Calling Number ID might have similar implications for telemarketers' telephone numbers. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Nov 96 08:51 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Instead of disgarding their packets, > shouldn't you be returning their packets to them, with a few packets > of your own saying in effect 'mail from your site is not welecome here' > or words to that effect. As it stands now, they are just assuming the > users at your site are not interested in the current spam offering and > they will continue to send various offerings. Why not be frank and > upfront with them about it? You can still automate the process and > not have to examine it all when it comes in. Two reasons: 1) I set up the packet filtering in about 15 seconds, since it just meant adding a single line to my router config file. Mail filtering is harder since at the moment I don't have a mail system that lets me filter all incoming mail based on the sender's IP address or domain. 2) Filtering makes it look to the spammers like my network is down, so they keep retrying, potentially causing congestion and delay in their mail program. I consider that a feature. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is the latest addition to the crowd. Someone sent me a rather large file making the rounds Thursday in all the newsgroups. It is almost identical to the one printed here a couple days ago operating in Cleveland, Ohio. I am not going to print the whole thing; there is a limit to the amount of time and patience I have for it. Here however are the details you need to know: This is another guy who welcomes spam accounts. He has all the latest techniques in place including fire walls to keeo you from getting to him, etc. He'll sort your incoming mail and like the one in Cleveland, he dares anyone to try and stop him. The header from the message he sent out: --------------------------------- Subject: SEND 15,000 EMAILS PER HOUR!! Xref: news3.idirect.com alt.magic:26784 Path: news3.idirect.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!news1.hotstar.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet From: MREMAIL@MREMAIL.COM Newsgroups: alt.magic Subject: SEND 15,000 EMAILS PER HOUR!! Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 22:53:46 Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc. Lines: 155 Message-ID: <566i25$qth@bolivia.earthlink.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: cust27.max22.los-angeles.ca.ms.uu.net Now the guy at idirect.com is who forwarded it to me so don't blame him. Probably it is from earthlink.net. Here are the things which are his claim to fame: ------------------------------- When SoftCell becomes your postmaster you will never lose your e mail addresses, dial-up connection or web site domain ever again. BULLET PROOF WEB SITE DOMAIN 10mg never have your site ripped down again 10 MEG WEB DOMAIN We move your site and transfer or register your domain with internic 5 Meg FLAME PROOF E MAIL BOX We will not except multiple message or unmarked attachments from any user. FIRE WALL Over 70,000 e mail addresses that can not access our server AUTO RESPONDER Easy and fast response Additional provider services: Online secure credit card transactions $35.00 per mo. Shopping Basket $20.00 per mo. Additional Auto responders $15.00 per mo Additional E Mail Accounts $30.00 per mo Additional Web space $10.00 per Mg per mo. Bulk E-Mailing Services E Mail addresses for sale Our addresses are by far the best available on the internet because they are all 75+% deliverable and we never sell the same list to the same type of business twice. We currently have over 7 million active e mail addresses. --------------------------------- Here is the parts you need to know about: Call now for more information: 714-825-4815 F R E E D E M O D O W N L O A D ! ! ! CALL NOW -- MR. EMAIL (DAVID) SoftCell Marketing Inc. CONTRACT IMPORTANT! FAX THIS LEGAL DOCUMENT TO: 714-574-9773 --------------------------- Omitted above are his price list, a long discussion of his features and how they work, etc. I am sure you are disappointed that I did not print it all. Deal with his fax and phone numbers above as you would with any company of whom you wish to make an inquiry. Has anyone noticed none of these creeps give an 800 number any longer? I wonder why? ... I really do not have a lot of time to bother with this one so reports from anyone who does have time will be welcome. It appears he is in southern California somewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Thomas Kroll Subject: Last Laugh! You Have Been Spammed! Organization: Indiana State University Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 20:28:02 GMT David Richards wrote: > Here's the latest offering from a mail-spam hosting firm. The headers > were via Interramp but the reply addresses are all forged. Note the > Cleveland maildrop and request to _fax_ them a check. > What a bunch of wimps!! THIS is SPAM, courtesy of: http://umbc7.umbc.edu/~jstron1/wspam-sketch.html Consider yourselves SPAMMED !!!!! The Spam Sketch From the second series of "Monty Python's Flying Circus" Transcribed 9/17/87 from "Monty Python's Previous Record" by Jonathan Partington (JRP1@PHX.CAM.AC.UK ) Scene: A cafe. One table is occupied by a group of Vikings with horned helmets on. A man and his wife enter. Man (Eric Idle): You sit here, dear. Wife (Graham Chapman in drag): All right. Man (to Waitress): Morning! Waitress (Terry Jones, in drag as a bit of a rat-bag): Morning! Man: Well, what've you got? Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam; spam bacon sausage and spam; spam egg spam spam bacon and spam; spam sausage spam spam bacon spam tomato and spam; Vikings (starting to chant): Spam spam spam spam... Waitress: ...spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam... Vikings (singing): Spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Waitress: ...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam. Wife: Have you got anything without spam? Waitress: Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it. Wife: I don't want ANY spam! Man: Why can't she have egg bacon spam and sausage? Wife: THAT'S got spam in it! Man: Hasn't got as much spam in it as spam egg sausage and spam, has it? Vikings: Spam spam spam spam (crescendo through next few lines) Wife: Could you do the egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam then? Waitress: Urgghh! Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like spam! Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!) Waitress: Shut up! Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam. Wife (shrieks): I don't like spam! Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your spam. I love it. I'm having spam spam spam spam spam spam spam beaked beans spam spam spam and spam! Vikings (singing): Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off. Man: Well could I have her spam instead of the baked beans then? Waitress: You mean spam spam spam spam spam spam... (but it is too late and the Vikings drown her words) Vikings (singing elaborately): Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam. Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Spam spam spam spam! Back to SPAM ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #617 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 15 11:37:06 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA04224; Fri, 15 Nov 1996 11:37:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 11:37:06 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611151637.LAA04224@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #618 TELECOM Digest Fri, 15 Nov 96 11:36:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 618 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson BT, MCI and Microsoft To Develop Global Intranet Services (Monty Solomon) Nexus Web Site is Now in Beta (John Cropper) Re: New E-Mail SPAM Provider (Dave Keeny) Re: New E-Mail SPAM Provider (Henry Mensch) Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line (David Clayton) Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN (Sander J. Rabinowitz) Re: Ameritech Questions (Nils Andersson) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Tony Toews) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (JP White) Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA (John Sullivan) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 15 Nov 1996 01:29:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: BT, MCI and Microsoft To Develop Global Intranet Services Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM BT, MCI and Microsoft To Develop Global Intranet Services The new services will be marketed worldwide by BT and MCI and offered by Concert, the existing BT and MCI joint venture global communications company. London, November 13th, 1996--- BT, MCI and Microsoft today said they will expand their alliances to develop a new suite of global intranet services. The new services will be marketed worldwide by BT and MCI and offered by Concert, the existing BT and MCI joint venture global communications company. The portfolio of intranet services, based on open and widely accepted Internet standards, will combine the global networking expertise of BT, MCI and Concert with the leading network and desktop applications offered by Microsoft. This unprecedented global intranet solution leverages the broad strengths of this alliance, including: The Concert managed data networking services, available from more than 800 cities in more than 50 countries, provided by BT and MCI. In addition, Concert InternetPlus Service, the world's first global Internet backbone, this week became operational between the United States and Europe and will support intranet transport for the new intranet service from BT, MCI and Microsoft. Concert InternetPlus Service, Concert Frame Relay Service and other BT/MCI communications services supporting the new intranet service will offer the service-level assurances required to support mission-critical intranet communications. The full range of Microsoft's messaging and intranet platforms, including the recently launched Microsoft (R) Commercial Internet System (formerly known as Normandy), Microsoft Exchange Server and the complementary intranet server products in the Windows NT (R)-based BackOffice (TM) family. The service will also utilize the Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.0 web browser and exploit the full capabilities of ActiveX (TM) controls. BT, MCI and Microsoft are combining these capabilities in an expansion of their existing alliances to address the rapidly growing intranet market. Demand for intranets, or private internets, is exploding because of the ease with which they enable information to flow within an enterprise and with customers and vendors. According to industry analysts, the total Internet market will be valued at $43 billion by 1999. By this time, products and services associated with building corporate intranets are expected to account for $28 billion -- more than half of the total Internet market. "BT's and MCI's leadership in global communications combined with Microsoft's advanced application software and position in the IT market, provide customers with a solid way forward to benefit from the intranet revolution," said Rupert Gavin, BT's director of Internet and Multimedia Services. "The new intranet service will be particularly appropriate for businesses wishing to form 'community of interest intranets' where there are real benefits to be gained from sharing information with business partners for mutual advantage - but where no one company would want to own or manage the infrastructure." "The obstacle facing our global customers is not in determining if an intranet makes sense, but rather how they are going to build it without losing momentum, and integrate it with their existing complex enterprise environment," said Stephen Von Rump, MCI's vice president of Enterprise Marketing. "We have built intranet applications for hundreds of our customers with locations in the U.S., as both stand-alone networks as well as part of larger enterprise solutions, and now look forward to working with our alliance partners, BT and Microsoft, to extend the benefits of intranets to our customers on a global basis." Cameron Myhrvold, vice president of Public Network Sales, Microsoft Corporation, said: "Microsoft is very excited by the opportunity to work with BT and MCI and exploit the Concert network to deliver the next generation of global intranets. Microsoft products are quickly becoming the popular choice for building intranets, with many of our corporate customers embarking on intranet projects and finding that it revolutionizes the way they work, at extremely low set up cost. This service takes the concept a stage further, making it even simpler to create and maintain intranets. BT and MCI will deliver value added, turn-key intranet solutions to multi-site customers combining Microsoft intranet platforms with the performance, security and global reach of the Concert managed network." BT, MCI, Concert and Microsoft plan to respond to two sets of customer demands. One is for a range of intranet solutions for businesses that want to build and manage their own intranet, making available from a single source all of the software, hardware and communications services necessary to develop secure, reliable intranet applications. The second, to be rolled-out in early 1997, is for a fully managed, network-based intranet service for customers seeking a communications partner that can build and manage their intranet on a global basis. Both intranet service offerings will support a range of intranet applications. For example: * information management tools, including authoring, publishing and web searching; * e-mail and gateways to other mail systems as well as groupware; * project collaboration tools, including private news groups and bulletin boards; * powerful directory facilities; and * software distribution, to distribute and upgrade software programs to employees throughout an organization. "Building on the success of Concert's managed data services, the new intranet service will offer a complete end-to-end intranet solution bringing customers a robust and secure environment on a global scale," said Peter Erskine, president and CEO, Concert. BT is one of the largest and most successful telecommunications companies in the world. It has a market capitalization of more than $36 billion, operations in 30 countries and employs about 130,700 people worldwide. BT's principal activity in the fully competitive UK market is the supply of local, long distance and international telecommunications services, serving over 27 million residential and business exchange lines through a fully modernized and largely digital network. With MCI, the second largest carrier in the US, BT has a one billion dollar joint venture named Concert to create a global network and advanced products and services for multi-national customers. BT also has joint ventures in Spain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, South Africa, New Zealand, Japan and India. MCI, headquartered in Washington, D.C., provides a full range of integrated communication services to more than 20 million customers. Credited with opening up the U.S. long distance market for competition, MCI is now leading the charge to bring competition to the $100 billion local market, offering American consumers for the first time the freedom to choose their local carrier. With quarterly annualized revenue of more than $18 billion, MCI is one of the largest and fastest growing telecommunication companies in the world. 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. Concert develops advanced networking services for BT and MCI to market to global companies. Today, Concert's intelligent network platform provides an array of global communications services to 3000 customers. Concert services are available through MCI, BT and 36 additional distributors in North America, Europe and Asia. The Concert network has 6,000 nodes deployed in over 800 cities in over 50 countries. NOTE:Microsoft, ActiveX, BackOffice and Windows NT are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. ------------------------------ From: psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) Subject: Nexus Web Site is Now in Beta Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 09:31:37 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com I am now in the process of beta-testing our new web site. The data contained in it is about 75% complete. The URL is: http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm I have to update some of the links in it, and make a few updates here and there, but it should be up and running full steam by Monday, the 18th, at the very lastest ... (Yes, to all those out there, it means 'no more waiting until the 1st of the month' for updates) John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ From: Dave Keeny Subject: Re: New E-Mail SPAM Provider Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 09:40:08 +0500 Organization: Telecommunications Techniques Corporation Reply-To: keenyd@ttc.com David Richards wrote: > Here's the latest offering from a mail-spam hosting firm. The headers > were via Interramp but the reply addresses are all forged. Note the [lengthy snip] > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well about all I can suggest is that > people lean very heavily on interramp.com for allowing this customer > (Cyber-Times) to be on their site and that readers of this message [snip] I would be surprised if Interramp were involved in this, other than being the host for this particular e-mail. Once upon a time, I received an ad from someone who falsified their identity. At that time (Aug '96) Interramp had a published policy which included the following: > * The posting of any advertisement or other commercial solicitation > to any newsgroup or mailing list is strictly prohibited. PSINet > reserves the right to determine whether a post constitutes an > advertisement or commercial solicitation. > * Impersonating another user or otherwise falsifying one's user > name in e-mail or any post to any newsgroup or mailing list is > strictly prohibited. Four days after alerting Interramp, I was received this message: > The account responsible for the spam has been located and terminated. > They had been forging headers and making it difficult to trace them, > but we have finally tracked them down. They went to quite an effort to find the user. I'll send a copy of Mr. Richard's e-mail directly to the person at Interramp who responded last time. If Richard's plans on using Interramp as his e-mail pipeline and they haven't changed policy, this toad will have to find a new pond. Dave [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I guess that makes sense. If the very responsible ISPs of the net are aware community heat will come down on them, they'll continue to avoid spammers/junk-emailers like the plague. The spammers will keep wandering around looking for a home somewhere and in those cases where an ISP is hospitable to them, then you block those ISPs entirely from reaching your site. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 22:23:42 -0800 From: henry mensch Subject: Re: New E-Mail SPAM Provider Well, I'm not sure it's going to go very far; there's no cyber-times.org registered with the InterNIC. The domain name cyber-times.org is not known to DNS, either. henry mensch / / pob 14592; sf, ca 94114-0592; usa ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 09:48:16 GMT Organization: Customer of Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) contributed the following: > Larry English (lenglish@atlanta.nsc.com) writes: >> Suddenly a new feature has appeared on my residential phone line. >> I noticed that if I'm talking to someone, I can "flash" the hookswitch, >> make another call [without disconnecting the first call], and then ... > Pat responds: >> It is known as 'Three Way Calling' and some telcos have begun >> offering it on a 'per-use' basis as well as by monthly subscription. > Here in Bell Canada land, if you buy three-way calling by the month, > it works as Larry describes. But if you don't subscribe and want to > use it, then you have to dial *71. This eliminates the hazard that > people unaware of having the service might use it accidentally and > incur the pay-per-use charge, as Larry has probably done. Just out of interest, in Australia the dominant carrier, Telstra, recently provided "Call Waiting" for free to all customers on compatible exchanges. Since all answered calls cost money here, the telco finally figured out that they get no revenue for busy tone, but with call waiting in use they get a hell of a lot more answered calls, and therefore revenue, for a minor loss in monthly rental, and the customers think that they are getting something for nothing! Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 06:31:44 CST From: Sander J. Rabinowitz Subject: Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN Dale Neiburg wrote: > According to my Rand McNally atlas, Spring Hill has a population of > less than 1100. Do they really have two COs? That figure may be notably larger, although I don't have exact numbers. If it was based on the 1980 census, it would have been well before the opening of the Saturn Corporation complex, and even in 1990, that facility was just starting. Spring Hill has been expanding ever since, even to the point of annexing additional land for the town. Spring Hill would seem to connected to at least two CO's, due, I think, largely from the county split. To the south, in Maury Co., residents use 615-486 and 615-489 (although a large percentage of both exchanges are reserved/used by Saturn and also for paging systems). To the north, in Williamson Co., residents use Williamson Co. exchanges (i.e., 615-794, 615-791, 615-595, and so on). To a certain extent, the situation is already a mess. Residents desiring to dial over the county line must dial all 11 digits, and is treated by Bell South as a long distance call. I have confirmed this from the pay phone at the local gas station in Thompson's Station, Tenn., which is just north of Spring Hill, and only three miles north of the Maury Co. line. Sandy Rabinowitz, Electronic Data Systems, at Saturn Corporation in Spring Hill, Tennessee. a400@edge.net SANDER J. ("SANDY") RABINOWITZ http://edge.net/~a400 Spring Hill, TN 37174-1195 USA ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com Subject: Re: Ameritech Questions Date: 14 Nov 1996 20:30:05 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , srkleine@midway.uchicago. edu (steven r kleinedler) writes: > No -- we don't need to see the whole 312 area -- we know that the city > line is the boundary on the outer edge. I just want to see a map > of the jagged line that runs roughly along North, Western, and 35th > (Lake Michigan's the fourth boundary). The boundary is really erratic > in places, and I thought if *anyone* had a map of it, it'd be > Ameritech. I think that much more important than a map is a list of prefixes, including those that change and those that don't. Preferably, the list should be available as machine-readable so that people with large databases can upgrade smoothly. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: ttoews@agt.net (Tony Toews) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 05:11:59 GMT Organization: TELUS Communications Inc. Louis Raphael wrote: > I've had that happen. I quite often get four-hour notices when mailing > certain people nowadays. *That* I find terrible. E-mail is one of the most > useful features of the 'net, and one that requires very little in the way > of resources -- yet often unusable because of the surfers. It would be good > if there were some mechanism for reserving a small percentage of bandwidth > for e-mail -- and that's all it would take (remember how much e-mail BITnet > could handle on 14.4K lines?). I'm almost certain that the four hour notice is because the other end's mailer is not ready to receive mail. I test the speed of my email by sending a dummy email to fedex. They have an autoresponder to which you send up to 20 waybill numbers and they email you back all the info they have on those waybill numbers. I usually get a response back within a few seconds. (Thanks Fedex!) I was doing holiday relief for a small community web server nearby. I had to reboot the NT server and for some unknown reason the mail service didn't start. I knew this because I sent the administrator an email telling him what I did when I got home. And I too got the four hour notice so I knew there was a problem. . So once I started the email service a day or two later when I was there next a bunch, well five or ten messages, started coming in from other ISP's, including that message I just mentioned and the mail got through. Tony Toews, Independent Computer Consultant Jack of a few computer related trades and master (or certified) of none. Microsoft Access Hints & Tips: Accounting Systems, Winfax Pro, Reports and Books at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 08:49:24 -0800 From: JP White Reply-To: ffv.aerotech@ffvaerotech.com Organization: FFV Aerotech Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) wrote: > Certainly, there is a price that would keep most users off the net; if > you set the price that high, there is no congestion. But what good is > it for you that there is no congestion, if you cannot afford to > connect? Good point. Charging for peak usage would be like putting a toll charge on all downtown interstates because of congestion. Sure it would cure the congestion problem, but is that the solution we are really looking for? A fourth or fifth lane on the highway makes more sense as a solution. I hate Al Gore's term 'Information Highway', but if we treat the internet like one, then let's just keep expanding the system to meet demand. Whilst expanding real highway's damages the environment by encouraging more traffic, what harm does expanding the internet have? Indeed if the internet can increase the number of telecommuters then it may actually benefit the environment. Let's not place a 'Toll' on the internet, after all a toll is not that different than a tax, and who needs more of that! JP White Manager Information Systems FFV Aerotech Inc., Mailto:ffv.aerotech@ffvaerotech.com Web: http://www.ffvaerotech.com ------------------------------ From: sullivan@interramp.com (John Sullivan) Subject: Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA Date: Fri, 15 Nov 96 15:54:06 GMT Organization: PSINet A couple points in response to various other msgs in this thread: 1. The reason Sprint has a GSM network in DC and CDMA everywhere else is because the DC network is actually run by a company called American Personal Communications, which won a pioneer's preference license for the DC/Baltimore area. That's why they were up so much earlier than the rest of Sprint. Sprint basically bought out the Washington Post Co.'s 49 percent interest and they decided to use the Sprint brand for marketing reasons. They do indeed waffle on converting the DC network over to CDMA and with good reason. APC hates CDMA, and they have been very successful with GSM. The _last_ think APC wants to do is suddenly tell their 100 thousand plus customers that they all have to dump their phones for new ones just so they can synch up with the rest of the Sprint network. (I have a feeling this is why Sprint suddenly changed the service offering name from Sprint Spectrum to Sprint PCS, but I don't see how that's really going to help. As this thread demonstrates, there is growing confusion among the customer base.) 2. BellSouth does indeed have GSM service in all its major markets -- but this is PCS markets, not its wireline territory. Their PCS coverage is in the Carolinas and the very eastern part of Tennessee. 3. All the currently active GSM carriers in the US are part of the GSM MoU organization and have roaming agreements in place. This doesn't necessarily mean that you can actually roam now, but I've heard reports that you can roam from Sprint into BellSouth and into Omnipoint in New York. The ones that aren't working will be up soon. PacBell said it would take about six weeks or so after launch because they're using a different vocoder and need to do some software upgrades to the base stations to support the other vocoders, etc. By the end of the year or early 97 all this should be worked out and you should be able to roam without too much trouble. 4. Other GSM carriers who are currently active: Powertel which has several cities in the southeast in what is called "soft launch" which means the network is up and running with a limited number of commercial customers but they haven't done their big media blitz and grand opening yet; and Western Wireless, which has networks scattered across the western states. They have Salt Lake City, Albuquerque, Portland Oregon, and Honolulu up now. John Sullivan Senior Editor, PCS Week jsullivan@phillips.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #618 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 15 12:29:04 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA09831; Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:29:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:29:04 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611151729.MAA09831@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #619 TELECOM Digest Fri, 15 Nov 96 12:29:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 619 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson More on Pay-Per-Use Features (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming (Peter M. Weiss) Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers (Sir Topham Hatt) Re: BellSouth's Own New " (Wes Leatherock) Computer Telephony Meeting December 4 (Robert Becnel) Questions Regarding Show-N-Tell Development Language (robrich@zippo.com) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Kimmo Ketolainen) Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada (Leonard Erickson) Len Levine's Condition (Eric Florack) Re: Banks Bullying Credit Unions (Randy Miller) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 15 Nov 1996 09:56:19 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: More on Pay-Per-Use Features As I've mentioned in previous articles, I am served out of a #1AESS switch from BellSouth, which handles the 504-24x prefixes (the "Seabrook" switch in New Orleans, which was known as CHestnut-x in the old dialed exchange name days). "Pay-per-use" three-way calling in (most) #1AESS offices can *only* be used by dialing a *71 (or 1171) code at the very beinning of the entire call's 'first leg'. However, from *digital* switches in BellSouth (#5ESS and DMS), BellSouth recently added *full three-way flashing privilages* to ALL (POTS) lines, even to those who didn't subscribe to 'monthly' three-way. In Louisiana, the charge for a 'per-use' three-way call if you don't subscribe on a monthly basis (or don't have the "Complete Choice" pay-one-monthly-price package of custom calling and CLASS features) is 75-cents per-use. Pay-per-use Call-Return *69/1169 and Repeat-Dial *66/1166 for those who don't subscribe on a monthly basis is also 75-cents per-use. I don't know exactly when the "Seabrook" switch is going to be changed from a #1AESS to a digital switch. I have "Complete Choice" on my number, but my parents' number (504-242-xxxx) only has Call-Waiting, and more recently, they added 'touchtone' service (in Louisiana, now only nine-cents a month - that's one penny less than a dime!). All of their phones are 1950's and 60's vintage WECO 500 desk sets, rotary dial, either ivory or beige, to match their color scheme, except that the cordless unit (also ivory) can be switched betwen tone or pulse. Now that they have 'touchtone' service, the cordless base unit has been set to 'tone' dialing, and I can use my Radio Shack battery powered portable acoustic tone-dialer to 'break' initial dialtone from the older rotary phones, when trying to callup radio talkshows from their phone. However, they never did use per-use three-way. Every now and then, I'd set up a three-way call with 1171 or *71, and pay my Dad the $1.00 or 75-cents for those calls when he got the bill. But when the "Seabrook" switch is eventually upgraded to 'digital', pay-per-use three-way will be 'stealthfully' available at any time during a 'stable' call in progress, by a simple flash of the switch-hook. I called up BellSouth's Business Office last night, and requested a free blocking on pay-per-use three-way on their line. They won't be able to dial 1171 or *71 at all anymore, and when our switch is upgraded to a digital office, they won't have that *stealth* pay-per-use three-way with a simple flash of the switch-hook. I explained the situation to my Dad about how people in BellSouth regions served by digital switches who didn't subscribe to monthly three-way have recently been having 'mysterious' pay-per-use three-way charges on their bill. And sometimes, "the kids" are running up rather large bills from such lines doing per-use three way, by simply flashing and adding a third party into the conversation, without any requirement of having to specifically initiate such a call with *71/1171. Other people in the area who don't subscribe to monthly three-way and who are served out of digital switches have asked me about this 'stutter' dialtone if they try to place another call right after hanging up from the first call! I told my Dad that I was trying to keep such confusion about such billings and 'stutter' dialtone off of his service, *before* our switch is upgraded. Also, I found out that in Louisiana, BellSouth POTS residential/business lines *can* have the local directory (1-411) 'auto-call-completion' feature restricted at no extra cost! I had the blocking put onto my number. Now, on those few times a call to local directory is placed 1-411, after the system automatically quotes out the requested listing, the directory switch will simply disconnect, *without* attempting to give the option of "to complete a call to this number for an extra thirty-one cents, just 'dial-1' or 'say-yes' at the tone". Last week, I checked with AT&T about their *up-front* prompt, "Directory Link, which can complete your call for an additional (fifty cents), 'press-1' to accept, 'press-2' to reject". For a few years now, I've been receiving this prompt on calls via AT&T to other NPA's DA/information, when a calling card, (10(10)288+0+NPA+KLondike-5-1212, or via 800-CALL-ATT or 800-3210-ATT. Only more recently, I've been getting this prompt on calls from home to 'foreign' NPA directory placed as 1+. AT&T told me that it *can* be blocked from 1+ access, but they might not necessarily be able to block the "Directory Link" auto-call- completion when I call KL.5-1212 information (via AT&T) in other area codes by billing to one of my Bell or AT&T calling card numbers. I did ask them to block "directory link" on my home number when 1+ access is used. However, I have started to make most of my calls to KL5.1212 via MCI (10(10)222+1+NPA+) recently, as MCI routes me to 'genuine Bell/LEC' inward directory in other NPA's, while AT&T seems to route me to a 'third party entity directory provider' when calling information in other states in the US. AT&T *does* seem to give me genuine Bell/LEC inward directory when calling one in Canada, however. Another rather recent 'pay-per-use' feature now being extended to AT&T's 1+ access (in some areas) is "True Messages". It has been available on AT&T 0+ or 800- access calls (Card, Collect, 3rd-Party billing) for several years now. This is the 'feature' where if a number is busy, or if not answered within a certain number of rings, you get the prompt: "The line is busy" (yes I hear the busy signal! now they don't even let you hear busy), or after an AT&T set number of unanswered rings, "Your party is not answering", follwed by in both cases: "To leave a message, for a charge, using AT&T's True Messages, press pound(#)-123, now". If a number is busy, since more people have Call Waiting these days, I expect that they are in the middle of a 'three-way' call (which in some switches 'cancels' out CW), or they are 'flashing' between two calls in a CW situation, or they are in the middle of 'dialing out' a number themselves (which also 'cancels' out CW until dialing is finished, and their outgoing call has 'cut thru'), or they might have cancelled CW on a fax or modem call. I will attempt to call that number later on. If I shoose to pay to record and have the network *attempt* to deliver a message to a continued busy number, I'll place a *separate* call to some service, even one provided by AT&T, to activate the billing process, and record the message. If a number doesn't answer after a few rings, these days more people have answering machines and voicemail service. Some answering machines pick up after a longer number of rings than others do. Some people have Call Forward on 'no answer' set to a certain number of rings (as I do with my home phone forwarding to my cellular; and my cellular has a voicemail as well). If I know that the person has an answering machine and/or voicemail, or some form of CF-on-busy/no-answer, I will wait for their message or forwarding to speak with someone, if I choose to leave a message. Again, if I wanted to pay for recording and attempted delivery of a message, I'll place a *separate* call to such a service provider. I asked AT&T about 'blocking' "True Messages". They told me that they are experimenting with the prompt on 1+ access calls from POTS lines in some areas. But they could 'flag' my account so that my home line won't have this prompt on 1+ outgoing calls, if they 'experiment' with it in my area. But if I *wanted* the feature, they *could add* it. I probably never will desire it to automatically 'barge-in' on busy/unanswered/intercept calls dialed 1+. I also asked if I could have it blocked on all (AT&T handled) *incoming* calls to my number, as I have CF-busy/no-answer from my home number to my cellular phone, and I have BellSouth Mobility's voicemail ("Mobile Memo") if my cellular is 'busy' or not answered, or off-air, etc. Unfortunately, since the *calling* party might choose to *pay* to deliver a message (via AT&T), they 'must' be automatically be given the "True Messages" prompt, as I was told by the service rep. And it seems that I can't get the "True Message" prompt turned off on any outgoing (10(10)288)+0+ or 800-access calls which I bill to any of my Bell or AT&T calling card numbers. As for those situations (away from my home number and billing to calling card) when I am calling Directory (via AT&T) such as to Canadian NPA's, where I am still getting the "Directory Link" prompt, even though the inward directory is genuine LEC/Stentor, I still can 'press-2 to reject' or just ignore the up-front prompt. And if I get "the line is busy" or "your party is not answering" followed by the "True Messages" request menu on calls I place billed to card, all I will do with touching the '#' button is place a second (sequence) call to that number, or a sequence call to another number altogather, or eventually 'hang up' and try later! I am *not* going to press '1-2-3' after I press the pound (#). As for incoming calls, I have to tell people to *completely ignore* the "True Messages" prompt, and just let the incoming call 'eventually' roll over to voicemail, as my outgoing message 'supes' the connection, dropping the "True Messages" option from the connection, whereupon they will then hear my outgoing message and can leave an incoming one. Unfortunately, some people just hangup, not knowing what is going on, thus not even waiting to reach voicemail. Also unfortunate is how we've read here in TELECOM Digest that in some instances, AT&T's "True Messages" has over-riden the far-end LEC's 'intercept with new number referral' messages, as intercept doesn't really 'supe': inward far-end LEC: "The number you have reached, 205-555-0000 has been changed. The new number is, 334-" AT&T cuts in: "Your party is not answering. To leave a message, for a charge..." LEC: "Please make a note of it. Repeat, 205-555-0000 has been changed to 334-555-" AT&T: "Press #123, now" New features *can* be nice and convenient. But a *flood* of new features, all with their various charges and ideosynchrocies can turn-off valued customers. If a customer doesn't like a new feature which has been THRUST upon them, particularly if they have to *PAY* to use it (such as if they *inadvertantly activated it*, or if they *did deliberately activate* it but *didn't know* what the charge is - or that there even is a charge), there SHOULD be *proper public notification* as well as the opportunity to BLOCK/ RESTRICT/ TURN-OFF such feature (or access to feature), for their account, at NO charge! Most of the time, I just prefer to "Dial-it-myself, and SAVE!" (For those who don't know, "Dial-it-yourself, and SAVE!" was an advertising slogan used in many locations, by Bell/telco throughout the 1960's, when customer 1+ DDD was being more completely phased-in across North America, and Bell wanted to promote that customer dialed toll calls cost less than operator assisted ones). MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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 ------------------------------ Organization: Penn State University Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 11:39:11 EST From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: New and Creative Trends in Spamming SPAM is the topic of conversation on at least two public Internet lists: Network-wide ID Full address and list description --------------- --------------------------------- SPAM-L SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM Spam Prevention Discussion List SPAMAD SPAMAD@INTERNET.COM SPAMAD - Discussion of Unsolicited Advertising Online Pete Weiss at Penn State ------------------------------ From: lr@access1.digex.net Subject: Re: How ISPs Can Protect Themselves From Spammers Date: 15 Nov 1996 15:24:01 GMT Organization: Intentionally Left Blank Martin Baines (martinb@reading.sgi.com) wrote: > I have noticed that all of the ATM's in the UK use a simple algorithm > to minimise this risk: they give don't give you any money until the > very end of the transaction i.e. after they have given you your card > back. As most people know not leave until they get their money not > many fall into the trap. Of course if all you do is check your > account, you could still run into the problem. Actually, IBM's tellers always worked this way. > It rather threw me when I used an ATM in the US, and it ejected money, > without giving me the card back. I had got so used to the normal way > in the UK it felt wrong. Some US tellers now don't even retain the card. You just "dip" or "swipe" it. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: At the local 7/Eleven here they have a very limited ATM. All it does is dispense cash in increments of twenty dollar bills, sell postage stamps and provide your balance. You just 'swipe' your card in a slot on the side. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 22:43:29 GMT Organization: Hotel California BBS Subject: Re: BellSouth's Own New "COCOTs" Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > "Traditional" telco coin phones had their own dedicated trunks to an > operator's center, as well as their own distinct appearance of > incoming jacks on a manual cord-board, or buttons/lamps on a TSPS > board. Many hotel systems had a similar arrangement. Non-coin POTS > residential and non-PBX business locations came in to the operator on > its own dedicated jacks or buttons/lamps. In more recent times, there were combined trunks from some offices, particularly smaller ones, and coin telephones were identified by a spurt of tone as the operator plugged in. As I recall, the designation strips for these trunk groups were half-white, half-red (white on the top half of the strip, red on the bottom half) to call attention to the fact there were coin stations in the group. (Red strips traditionally identified the dedicated coin trunks.) Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu ------------------------------ From: becnel@crl.com (Robert Becnel) Subject: Computer Telephony Meeting December 4 Date: 14 Nov 1996 20:59:47 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [Login: guest] ANNOUNCEMENT Contact: Tony Zafiropoulos (314) 537-3959 November 15, 1996 Next Computer Telephony Integration User's Group Set For December 4 on the Hammer Technology Testing Platform for CTI Topic: The program will involve a demonstration of the widely-acclaimed Hammer IT product by Paul Mitchell, Regional Sales Representative of Hammer Technology. This product is a telephony test system designed to meet the complete needs of testing computer telephony and enhanced services systems and applications according to Hammer Technologies. The December event is the rescheduled October event. Date/Time: Wednesday, December 4, 1996; 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM (approx) Location: Bridgeton Trails Library (Rm #1) - 3455 McKelvey Road St. Louis, MO (one block south of St. Charles Rock Road) (see map at http://www.ctitek.com/ctiusers/library_map.html) Cost: None. New members welcomed monthly free of charge. Note: All 1997 meetings will be held on the first Wednesday of the month. ***No meeting scheduled for January 1*** Next meeting is February 5,1997 Robert G. Becnel becnel@crl.com (email) http://www.crl.com/~becnel (www) ------------------------------ From: robrich@supper.zippo.com Subject: Questions Regarding Show-N-Tell Development Language Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 12:57:54 GMT Organization: Zippo Do any developers out there use Show-N-Tell as a development language? If so, could anyone answer any of my following questions? We are using a Rhetorex RTNI 2-T1 card with a 2400 RDSP card and two Brooktrout TR-114 fax cards. We have the problem that for some reason, the RDSP card is returning an unexpected return code error when trying to Send or Receive a fax. This problem is sporatic but once it occurs, it seems as if the problem spreads to all the lines. It doe clear up after a while but will show up again maybe a day later. Also, we just encountered another problem when sending a fax. Occasionally, a line may freeze on a Send Fax powerblock. This is usually just limited to one or two of the lines, leaving the others unaffacted. The only solution to this problem has been to reboot the entire system and re-load the firmware. No errors show up, but the line just remains off-hook on that powerblock with no way to stop the line. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Rob ------------------------------ From: Kimmo.Ketolainen@utu.fi (Kimmo Ketolainen +358 40 555 5508) Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: 14 Nov 1996 18:09:20 +0200 Organization: University of Turku Ian Angus wrote: > It's even worse in other parts of the world -- it's astounding how > many computer companies, for example, run ads which are seen world > wide, with no method of contact except a US-only 800 or 888 number. U.S. 800 and 888 numbers _can_ be dialed from abroad. I suspect most Western European countries have an operator allowing this. All three Finnish (universal access) international operators allow dialing 00 1 800 ... (or with their own access code) for the normal U.S. rate. Kimmo Ketolainen * kk@sci.fi * (www.iki.fi/kk) * +358 40 555 5508 ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Service Wanted to Call US 800 Numbers From Canada Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 23:29:01 PST Organization: Shadownet Dale Kramer writes: > Is there a service that I can use that allows me (in Canada) to call a > toll number in the US and then get tied into a line that lets me call > an 800 number that can not be normally dialed from Canada? Is there > any way at all possible to call a US 800 number from Canada? Why not try using 880? That is, instead of dialing 800-xxx-yyyy, dial 880-xxx-yyyy. For 888 numbers, substitute 881. If it works, you'd be charged LD for at least part of the distance, but it'd otherwise be ok. This dodge *was* created to allow folks outside ITU zone 1 to reach 800 and 888 numbers, but I suspect that it'll work for out of region 800 calls too. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 06:06:34 PST From: Eric_Florack@xn.xerox.com (Florack,Eric) Subject: Len Levine's Condition Pat says: > Computer Privacy Digest moderator Len Levine suffered a heart attack > in mid-October and after a stay of several days in Columbia Hospital > in Milwaukee, WI is now resting at home. I'm very sorry to hear it, and wish him a speedy and full recovery. I can't help but half-jokingly wonder, though, if there isn't something unique about technology conference moderators that makes them prone to such things, given that heart problems are a malady you two share. How have YOU been dealing with it of late? Do the doctors feel your problems are under control, now? Best regards, E [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing about Len Levine and for that matter about quite a few of the moderator/e-zine publishers on the net is that they have continued their full time employment while working on their newsgroup/mailing list as best they can otherwise. I don't frankly know how they can do it with the amount of time in a day. I used to do that myself until about 1993, but the volume of mail to the Digest simply became too overwhelming to do this newsgroup any justice at all without devoting someone to it pretty much full time, which turned out to be me. Len is to be commended for taking this as well as he has, and looking forward to getting things back on track at his end. How am I doing, you ask? That's a good question but I'll save the answer for another day. I have faith in myself and what I do here, but there are days when my faith is sorely tested. I am going to have to do *something* to get myself in stable financial condition by the first of the year or else rethink much of my priorities. I think my own two heart attacks came largely from stress, combined with too much food from IHOP and McDonald's. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Randy Miller Subject: Re: Banks bullying Credit Unions Date: Fri, 15 Nov 96 10:31:00 EST Pat writes: > I was a customer of Continental Bank in Chicago when Continental went > belly-up (the second time!) and the government made First National > Bank take over all the individual depositors but not the corporate > accounts. My First National account number still reflects after > ten years the fact that I am a 'conversion account' brought over from > Continental Bank in the middle 1980's. PAT] I thought Continental dumped all their personal accounts to First Chicago because they wanted to concentrate only on "business banking" (How well I remember the checks coming from 1200 West Washington (Follett Corporation) and the fun I had getting them cashed after that incident. They had a legend on them saying "Old Kent Bank, or if desired, Continental Illinois Bank." I had more than enough fun getting McHenry Savings Bank to cash it, especially on a Friday afternoon ;-)) This thread reminds me of a nasty incident I had this past Thursday with First Union of Virginia. Thursday was payday. As I was not going to make it back to PA (where I live, and yes I KNOW I'm crazy for commuting 250/day roundtrip to work, but this is Metro D.C., which while I'll work here, I WON'T live here) to get jerked aound by CoreStates Bank, I figured I'd cash the check at First Union, where my employer has their accounts. I go up to the Annadale branch at lunchtime, and they refused to cash the check on the grounds that there was NO MONEY IN THE ACCOUNT!!! Now Compex is a government contractor (DoD in particular). Having been burned once before by a different contractor when I worked for Naval Research and Development, I raised all sorts of it with Human Resources. Fortunately, the ladies in HR are on the ball: they were on the phone with First Union in about two minutes raising all sorts of hell. It turns out that my employer has payroll set up as a Zero-Based account. The teller at the Annadale branch (new teller, to wit) didn't read her terminal carefully enough. According to Human Resources, I am to expect an written apology from First Union any day for the harm they caused me, as well as Compex Corporation. Being the cynical skeptic that I am, I'll believe it when I see it. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #619 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 18 09:13:26 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA18380; Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:13:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:13:26 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611181413.JAA18380@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #620 TELECOM Digest Mon, 18 Nov 96 09:13:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 620 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson VA Needs a *FIFTH* NPA Soon (John Cropper) Tennessee Orders CLECs to Provide "Own" Directory Assistance (Stan Cline) The AT&T "Transfer Service Fee" (Stanley Cline) Payphone Deregulation (John Stahl) BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades (Ed Ellers) Request For Information About IRIDIUM Project (acq001@ps.uib.es) Internet Telephony Trade Association Formed (oldbear@arctos.com) How to Assign an ATM Adapter Card For PC With PCI Bus (Zhu Feng) Catching An Annoying Caller (Derek J Tarcza) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) Subject: VA Needs a *FIFTH* NPA Soon Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 11:34:32 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com From Bell Atlantic: November 13, 1996 Dwindling Pool of Phone Numbers Sparks Need for New Area Code in Northern Virginia Bell Atlantic suggests overlay code to avoid splitting communities ARLINGTON, Va. -- Northern Virginia faces a dwindling supply of telephone numbers which will prompt the introduction of a fifth area code in the state in 1999. The announcement came today following a day-long meeting in Arlington of officials from various segments of the telecommunications industry. "Our reserve of telephone numbers in the 703 area code is diminishing at an astonishing rate," said Hugh Stallard, president and CEO of Bell Atlantic-Virginia. The 703 code, which at one time served the entire state, is now assigned only to telephone customers in Northern Virginia. The shortage is triggered by the explosive popularity of cellular telephones, multiple residential telephone lines, pagers, fax machines and modems. Further demand for numbers is coming from new companies seeking to provide local phone service in Northern Virginia. "At the current pace of growth, we will run out of numbers late in 1999," Stallard said. The '703' area includes the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax and Falls Church, and the counties Arlington, Fairfax, Prince William and eastern Loudoun County (including Leesburg). Of the 761 exchange codes (first three digits of a phone number) available for assignment in the 703 area, only 313 remain. An exchange code can contain as many as 10,000 telephone numbers. Creation of a new area code would, in effect, free up over seven million new telephone numbers. Stallard said he will ask the Virginia State Corporation Commission to consider a new type of "overlay" area code for Northern Virginia, one that would not divide the community geographically. Maryland introduced two new overlay area codes earlier this year. The new overlay area code would follow the same existing boundaries of the 703 code. When all phone numbers in the 703 area are used up, additional phone numbers in the same area would be given the new area code. "We won't have to chop up Fairfax County. Arlington and Alexandria won't be split from Fairfax," Stallard said. He added that the overlay area code would allow all current customers to keep their phone numbers. However, the overlay approach would require a change in the way local calls are dialed. Once it's introduced, all callers would need to dial the full 10-digit telephone number for a local call. Customers in Northern Virginia already dial 10 digits to call locally into the District of Columbia or suburban Maryland. If the overlay approach is accepted, Bell Atlantic will allow 10-digit local dialing beginning next summer. Customers would still be able to make local calls with seven digits during a one-year grace period. The new area code would not be assigned until all exchange codes are used in the '703' area. The overlay will have no effect on customer rates. "What is a local call today will be a local tomorrow," Stallard said. The alternative to the overlay approach is called a "geographic split." Stallard said a split would make no sense in a densely populated area like Northern Virginia. "Communities would be divided and hundreds of thousands of people would be forced to change their phone numbers," he said. Businesses in a new area code created by a split would have to change their stationery and business cards, promotional material and signs on company vehicles. Businesses and other customers throughout the old and new area codes would incur expenses to reprogram equipment, such as cellular phones and burglar alarms. Further, while businesses assigned to the new area code would bear the hardship of changing their telephone numbers, their competitors remaining in the current area code would not. "After studying all the issues, we believe the overlay is the most practical and the least disruptive approach to meeting the growing need for phone numbers. Clearly, it's in the best interests of all of our customers," Stallard said. The number of the new area code for Northern Virginia has not yet been selected. It will become the fifth area code in the Old Dominion, and the third new code for the state in the last two years. The '540' area code, which serves primarily the western part of the state, was spun off from '703' a year ago. Last July the '757' area code was introduced in the '804' area to serve Hampton Roads. Both times, the new area codes were created with geographic splits, forcing many customers to change their phone numbers. 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. John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Tennessee Orders CLECs to Provide "Own" Directory Assistance Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 02:48:07 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com [from _Chattanooga_Free_Press_, Nov. 15, 1996, p. F7.] Separate Directory Aid Decided by Phone Panel By Phil West, AP Writer Nashville, Tenn. -- The struggle to bring competition to Tennessee's telephone industry yielded at least one result Thursday: separate directory assistance operators. Soon, customers dialing 1411, or 555-1212 for long distance help, will talk to an operator of their local telephone company, whether it be BellSouth, MCI or AT&T. The decision may seem a small one, but it's a sign of progress for the Tennessee Regulatory Authority, which has 25 separate issues to settle before phone competition is a done deal. The TRA's work should clear the way for competitors to connect with BellSouth's network. That's the only way they can compete for local service. Competitors want to buy, at wholesale prices, parts of BellSouth's bundled services so they, too, can offer their call forwarding, call waiting, and similar add-ons. There have been major sticking points, especially how much BellSouth must discount its service for competitors who will re-package it with their own long-distance services. [end quote] SC's comments: There was a related article in the Atlanta paper today that made it sound that the TRA had mandated that *IXC's* use their own DA operators; I'm not sure if this is the case. The way the Chattanooga paper reports it, it only applies to *CLECs* and not *IXCs*. Besides, the TRA can't regulate what IXCs do with calls that go *outside* the state. The way it appears: * For local and intRASTATE DA calls, calls will go to an operator of the caller's *local telco*. (Even when LCI was providing their "own" DA -- they don't appear to anymore -- in-state calls ALWAYS went to BELLSOUTH [or Sprint for northeast TN; calls to Sprint would first go through BellSouth.]) * For intERSTATE DA calls, calls will go to an operator of the caller's *IXC* (or the local telco in the other area, depending upon the IXC.) Evidently the rules will also apply to CLECs in the areas of Georgia immediately adjacent to Chattanooga and Benton, TN that are under "Tennessee" rate regulation at the behest of the Georgia PSC. The only question I have is: What happens to independent LECs that already contract with *BellSouth* for DA? Will they be forced to implement their "own" DA operators as well? For the largest Tennessee independents (Citizens Telecom and TDS Telecom) this may be a minor issue, but for some of the telephone co-ops in middle Tennessee, this may hurt. (Sprint, which serves northeast Tennessee, is in a "non-Bell" LATA and therefore has its "own" DA and intraLATA operators.) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: The AT&T "Transfer Service Fee" Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 02:48:10 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com Several have written to the Digest wondering about the 55c/call "Transfer Service Fee" that AT&T now imposes on certain calls. Mark Becker wrote: > NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMERS > On October 31, 1996, AT&T filed with the Federal Communications > Commission a Transfer Service Fee of $0.55 per call. The Transfer > Service Fee applies to all completed interstate calls and calls to > interstate and international Directory Assistance when the customer > transfers to the AT&T network from a Local Exchange Company network. > This tariff revision became effective November 1, 1996. According to the _Atlanta_Constitution_ earlier this week [Tuesday, page A2]: "It's a new fee that took effect Nov. 1, but consumers won't encounter it often because most people dial their long-distance calls direct, said AT&T spokeswoman Lee Ane Kuster. But let's say you dial 0 for an operator to make a long-distance call, and your local exchange company transfers it to an AT&T operator. The local exchange company assesses a fee to AT&T whether the call is connected or not, Kuster said. AT&T assesses a fee only when it completes a call, she added. In cases when the fee is passed along to a customer, it is to recover AT&T's costs and not to generate a profit, she said." [end quote] SC's notes: This is what I thought all along -- that it does NOT apply to ANY 1+ calls, or to calls placed via 10288+0+, 1-800-Call-ATT, or 1-800-321-0288, but *only* to calls transferred to AT&T by a *LEC operator.* It still seems to me, however, that AT&T is taking the road that Dennis Dees (the "I Don't Care" long distance company man) has taken, by adding charges to calls going through the LEC operator. IOW, ignorance [dialing 0 instead of 00, 10288+, etc.] now costs more. I guess we just have to be careful, and dial FULLY (including 800/888/950 numbers, PIC codes, etc.) in order to get the lowest price! And Marty Tennant wrote: > I understand that this fee applies only if you are not a presubscribed > AT&T customer making the calls. Notice it does not apply to intralata > AT&T is doing this because they claim that these casual callers are more > expensive to bill, because they have to obtain billing information from > the LEC. This is a result of the lack of billing agreements between > AT&T and the LECs since AT&T started doing their own billing. The 55c/call charge doesn't apply in this situation -- the fee in this case is *80*c/call, and is known as the "Nonsubscriber Service Charge", not the "Transfer Service Fee." AFAIK it does NOT apply to INTRALATA calls, and it DEFINITELY DOES NOT APPLY TO 0+, 900, OR 500 CALLS. > calls. In the cases where dual PIC has not been implemented, as > required by the new law, the only way to get on the AT&T network for=20 My parents received an AT&T soliciation that stated if the check (forgot the amount) was cashed, that "local toll" calls would be PICed to AT&T as well. I don't know that BellSouth is doing dual-PIC here yet; I am loath to allow ANY carrier other than Bell to PIC me on intraLATA calls UNTIL BellSouth itself has a WORKING PIC code. BTW, I just switched to AT&T's "One Rate" plan on ONE of my lines -- in addition to the 15c/min anywhere outside local calling area(!) rate they are sending me a $15 check (to cover a $1.49 PIC-change charge) and providing 15 minutes of free 1+ calls for six months. Net gain: $27.01 ($15 - 1.49 + 90min*15c($13.50) =3D 27.01.) Not to mention free WorldNet access, and a free 500 number for three months (worth about $15.) (I like LCI, but their very high in-state rates were getting on my nerves.) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: John Stahl Subject: Payphone Deregulation Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 19:41:42 +0000 The following is a quotation from a recent NYSTA (New York State Telephone Association) monthly newsletter. In a section titled "The Regulatory Scene", by Robert Pluckett, a detailed description of yet another interesting new FCC development resulting from the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Here is Mr. Pluckett's outline of the latest FCC plans to deregulate the payphone market: "PAYPHONE DEREGULATION" "Continuing its' efforts to carry out requirements of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC has issued new rules to deregulate the payphone marketplace effective April 15, 1997." "The FCC's September 20, 1996 order addresses several issues to effectuate deregulation. including compensation to payphone owners for calls placed on other carriers' networks (i.e., dialed on a 10XXX basis) and calls to 800 numbers, local coin rates, presubscription of payphones, and accounting rules to deregulate existing LEC payphone costs and future payphone accounting rules." "Payphones are currently provided by traditional local exchange carriers (LEC's) and private payphone service providers (PSP's). First, the new rules establish a compensation structure to compensate payphone providers when callers, using a carrier other than the one to which the phone is presubscribed to, "dial around" to other carriers. Carriers will be required to track and compensate payphone owners on a per call basis. Initially, the compensation rate will be set at $0.35/call, however, until systems can be developed to track such calls, each PSP will be compensated for the first year at a flat amount of $45.85 per phone. This compensation will be proportionally divided among all interexchange carriers who have toll revenues in excess of $100 million per year." "The FCC's plan assumes (at least in the first two years, until the marketplace sets an appropriate rate) that all calls originating from a payphone are valued at a cost of $0.35." "LEC's are required to remove any inherent subsidies in payphone rates effective April 15, 1997 and would not receive compensation from carriers (for calls placed on a 10XXX and to 800 numbers) during the first year." "Regarding local call coin rates, states will be free to set the local coin rates as they do today. However, the market will be allowed to determine the local rate after the first year, unless the state can demonstrate that market failures exist. Eventually, assuming the FCC determines there are no market failures, local coin rates should equal the market determined compensation rate or the default compensation rate of $0.35 per call." "Since compensation rates that carriers will pay all payphone providers will be on a per call basis, all payphones will be required to generate the digits 07 or 27 within the Automatic Number Information (ANI) sent with the call. All LECs must also submit, on a quarterly basis, a list of payphone numbers to carriers. LECs must also make available to others any central office based payphone functionally it provides to its own phones." "In deregulating LEC payphones, the FCC concluded that structurally separate subsidiaries are not required, existing accounting rules could be used to treat payphone costs as deregulated (Part 64). On April 15, companies would treat all payphone assets, including any accumulated depreciation, accrued income tax liability, and interest as deregulated. Network investments (i.e., switch costs, loop costs) used to serve payphones remain regulated." "LECs are also required to remove any payphone costs from access charges (the Carrier Common Line element) and file new rates with the FCC by January 15, 1997, with effective date of April 15, 1997. Any bundled rates for semi-public payphone service would also need to be adjusted in local tariffs to remove any payphone costs if they are included. The FCC did not rule if a subscriber line charge (SLC) would apply to LEC payphones, referring the matter to the Joint Board. However, LEC's will be required, at a minimum, to impute a SLC in their payphone costs." "The FCC also ruled that, in markets with Intralata Presubscription, intralata traffic cannot be assigned to the LEC. The ruling also appears to impact independent telephone company payphones by requiring presubscription on all payphones. Previously, independent telephone companies were not required to presubscribe payphones." "Recognizing that a deregulated, competitive marketplace may not serve all locations where payphones provide a socially beneficial service, the FCC believes that states are best equipped to establish and administer programs for the placement of "public interest" payphones. The FCC recognized that states may address this issue in conjunction with their responsibilities for ensuring Universal Service"." These prescribed changes will surly add to the 'out-of-pocket' costs for everyone using payphones (and most everyone does). You know that the payphone providers and/or the LECs are going to increase their basic rates in order to cover these additional costs! Where are the savings that the 'Act' is supposed to give us? Everything the FCC seems to be doing as result of it are going to cost all of us more money to use the phone system! John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecom/Data Verifiers - CAT 5 Testing for Telecommunications/data Systems email: aljon@worldnet.att.net Tel: 607.786.9914 ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 17:56:17 -0500 Organization: Mikrotec Internet Services, Inc. (MISNet) BellSouth notified us early this month that the GLendale central office in Louisville would be upgraded, in early December, to a new digital switch. (The notice didn't say what the new switch would be, but I was told by BellSouth that it's a Lucent 5ESS- 2000.) This sounds all well and good, but the existing switch is a 1A ESS that was cut over in 1982 -- fourteen years ago. The notice from BellSouth didn't cite any new services that would be available from the 5ESS-2000, and in fact there aren't any services I know of that are available to POTS customers on digital switches here that also aren't on the 1A ESS. (Unlike the NYNEX situation mentioned in another post, BellSouth does provide Caller ID and all the other SS7-based services on its 1A switches.) Given that these switches were designed for a much longer service life -- forty years is a number I've seen in Bell System literature from the 1960s, when the 1ESS was introduced -- is it really justifiable for BellSouth to force ratepayers to pay for new switches so soon? ------------------------------ From: ACQ001@ps.uib.es Subject: Request For Information About IRIDIUM Project Date: 18 Nov 1996 13:12:10 GMT Organization: Universitat de les Illes Balears I'm looking for technical information about the IRIDIUM project. If you know about any address or any location in which I can find this information send me an e-mail. Greetings. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 04:12:13 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: Internet Telephony Trade Association Formed Here is a brief item which may be of interest to TELECOM Digest readers: NEW GROUP FORMED TO ADVANCE INTERNET TELEPHONY A coalition of about 40 vendors has formed the Voice Over IP (VoIP) Forum, with the goal of creating and deploying a set of technical standards for Internet telephony products, including hardware, software and networking. The group's formation was instigated by networking giant Cisco Systems and Internet telephony software firm VocalTec Inc., and includes companies such as Dialogic Corp., 3Com Corp., Creative Labs Inc., Micom Communications, Microsoft, Nortel, Nuera Communications, Vienna Systems, Voxware and U.S. Robotics. "The VoIP goal is to complement" the International Telecommunication Union's H.323 interoperability standard, and address those issues not covered by H.323, says VocalTec's chairman. source: InfoWorld Electric November 12, 1996 ------------------------------ From: xlzhu@moon.bjnet.edu.cn (Zhu Feng) Subject: How to Assign an ATM Adapter Card For PC With PCI Bus Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 16:48:17 GMT Organization: CerNIC--China Education and Research Network Information Center Can you tell me how to assign an ATM adapter card for PC with PCI bus using the following chip: IDT77201 PMC5346 ------------------------------ From: dtarcza@ix.netcom.com (Derek J Tarcza) Subject: Catching An Annoying Caller Date: 17 Nov 1996 03:56:35 GMT Organization: Netcom For about the last year, I've been getting hang-up calls and they just dont seem to quit. Lately they've been happening 4-5 times a week, but were a little bit less earlier this year. No matter how many rings i wait before answering the phone, I always hear the circuit disconnecting then dead silence. Caller ID is no help: Out-Of-Area. Same with *57: No Can Do ... Is there any other service that I can get to trace this call? Is there any offering of ANI for this type of situation? Thanks, Derek J. Tarcza DTarcza@ix.netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can ask the telco call annoyance bureau (may be known by other names in some telcos) to put a trap on your line. It is likely they will be able to catch it that way. Good luck in catching the pest. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #620 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 18 11:02:34 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA26950; Mon, 18 Nov 1996 11:02:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 11:02:34 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611181602.LAA26950@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #621 TELECOM Digest Mon, 18 Nov 96 11:02:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 621 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "Caller-Pays" 800/888, Ring-Down Points, Mexico, etc. (Mark J. Cuccia) Telco Loophole Exempts ISP's From Fees? (Derek Balling) Internet by Cable - The Down Side (John De Hoog) BellSouth's "Own" Payphone Breaks FCC Rules (Stanley Cline) Book Review: "Spinning the Web" by Ford (Rob Slade) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 18 Nov 1996 13:30:09 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: "Caller-Pays" 800/888, Ring-Down Points, Mexico, etc. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think 880 will be assigned. > I believe I read here in the Digest (possibly something from Mark Cuccia) > saying that 880 was among the 88x codes being reserved? PAT] The Bellcore-reserved "replace" codes for Caller-Pays 800/888 to for those outside of the US or NANP) reach not normally available toll-free 800/888 numbers in the US or NANP are 880 and 881. An 800-NXX-XXXX number to be reached, if the caller chooses to pay all/part of the toll/international billing is 'supposed' to be dialed (+1)880-NXX-XXXX. An 888-NXX-XXXX number to be reached, if the caller chooses to pay all/part of the toll/international billing is 'supposed' to be dialed (+1)881-NXX-XXXX. i.e., replace 800 with 880, replace 888 with 881. The problem with the 88x codes to be used as (special) NPA's is that since the 1970's, 'The Bell System' has been using 88x as a 'pseudo' NPA for billing identification purposes, for Mexico and also for non-dialable ring-down toll points. In the 1970's, 88x was used for billing purposes on (US/Canada originated) *operator* dialed calls to *automated* points in the Telefonos de Mexico network. The temporary 903 NPA had been usable since 1962 to call only certain border towns (about twelve or fifteen total) along the northwestern Mexican border states of Baja California N (bordering the US state of California), Sonora (bordering Arizona), Chihuahua (bordering the *US state* of *New* Mexico). These twelve of fiteen border towns in Mexico were historically *not* served by Telefonos de Mexico, but by a company which had a large US investment (historically dating back to the early days of telephony when AT&T wanted to own everything telephonic in the whole world), known at times as "The Frontier Telephone Company" or "The Border Telephone Company", or "The Northwest Mexican Telephone Company". AT&T made these towns customer and operator dialable using NPA 903, plus a two or three digit code, plus the (respective) five or four digit local telephone number. 903 was also used for billing purposes to identify calls placed *completely manually* by a US/Canada operator with the inward Mexican operator to reach rural non-dialable locations all over Mexico. Since 903 only had probably less than twenty dialable NNX codes for those border towns, there was an unused block of central office codes. AT&T used them as 'pseudo' central office codes to indicate all of these little manual non-dialable towns all over Mexico for billing identification. Actually, since these three-digit pseudo c/o codes within NPA 903 were *not* used as *dialable* or network routing codes, AT&T was assigning these "mark-sense" billing codes from the *entire* set of one-thousand possible 'XXX' codes (i.e. including 1XX or 0XX 'pseudo' c/o codes!). Beginning in the mid 1970's, customers in most parts (but not all) of the US and Canada could direct dial only to Mexico City and its environs. Mexico City by then was on a seven-digit basis, NXX-XXXX. Most seven-digit numbers began with the digit '5' around 1975. Some newer seven-digit Mexico City numbers around 1975 were beginning to have other first digits, *except* '9' (nor '0' or '1'). The Mexican *city* code for Mexico City was *also* the single digit '5'. The Mexican *city* codes for towns *surronding* Mexico City were three-digits, of the format '59X', and their local numbers were five-digits. Around 1970, AT&T 'reserved' NANP area code 90-5 for the purposes of customer dialing to Mexico City (+52-5) and other towns near Mexico City (+52-59X-), and as mentioned, this was possible beginning in the mid 1970's: 1/0+90-5+5XX-XXXX (and other NXX-XXXX except N as '9') for Mexico City 1/0+90-5+9X-X-XXXX for towns surrounding Mexico City For other automated points in Mexico (except for the northwest border towns described above), the *operator* would key the number as: Kp+180+ the Mexican City Code + local Mexican number +St if the city code were two-digits, the local number was six-digits if the city code were three-digits, the local number was five-digits The total number of digits for a Mexican 'national' number is eight-digits. For the billing processing, calls to automated Mexico (except for customer dialable Mexico City and northwest Mexico) were indicated as: 88+ the eight digit Mexican 'national' number. Thus, 881 through 884, and 886 through 889 were 'pseudo' NPA's for indication of billing to Mexico. 905+ the seven-digit Mexico City number or the seven-digit full combination for towns surrounding Mexico indicated billing for +52-5. 903-NNX-XXXX could indicate billing for those dialable border towns, while 903-XXX would indicate billing for a call to manual non-dialable town which could be located *anywhere* in Mexico. At the time (though the late 1970's), manually connected non-dialable locations in the US and Canada were identified for billing by their *own geographic NPA code*, followed by an unused central office code in that NPA. Sometimes, since this 'pseudo' c/o code was not intended for dialing or network routing, but only for billing, it could be from the *entire* pool of XXX, even 0XX or 1XX! This is similar to the 903 use for billing identification of manual non-dial points all over Mexico, as described above. But by the late 1970's, there were many other factors coming into play. AT&T was trying to make *all* of automated Mexico *dialable* by the customer, rather than having to have the operator place the call. There weren't enough N0X/N1X area codes available to 'conveniently' make the remainder of automated parts of Mexico as customer dialable, but 'as if it were part of the NANP. And while Mexico did have its own CCITT/ITU assigned +52 Country Code, calls from the US and Canada, to Mexico have been routed on a 'direct' basis, rather than going out through an international gateway switch. So, most of the remainder of Mexico was made customer dialable by dialing 011/01+ the country code for Mexico (52)+ the full eight-digit Mexican national number. *Billing* indication was changed to use 'pseudo' NPA codes 52X rather than 88X. i.e., in the billing equipment, 525-NXX-XXXX would indicate a call to a number in the Mexico City area. A total of nine 'pseudo' NPA codes were used: 521 through 524, 527, 528, 529. No Mexican City Codes begin with a '0', so there was no need for 520 used in this manner. (There was *NO* conflict with assigning 520 for the split of Arizona's 602 NPA a couple of years ago). 525 replaced the use of 905 in the billing equipment for Mexico City and other Mexican city codes beginning with '5'. 526 indicated Telefonos de Mexico handled locations in northwest Mexico, except for the northwestern border towns, as their Mexican City codes began with digit '6'. Also, in the late 1970's, in preparation for automation of calling card validation (first to be keyed by operators, later by customers), there were 'special account' card numbers. It was decided to have calling card numbers now of the fourteen-digit format NXX-NXX-XXXX (the billing telephone number) plus a four digit PIN code (NXXX). Special account card numbers were to be based on the RAO (Revenue Accounting Office) code number: RAO+1/0XX+xxxx, plus a PIN (NXXX). RAO codes had been in existance for quite a long time. But only here would they be used 'intermixed' with area codes. For *calling card* and billing functions, the distinction would be that if after an NXX, the fourth digit were a '0' or a '1', the initial NXX were an RAO code and *not* an area code; while if the fourth digit were *not* a '0' or '1' (i.e., if it were an 'N' format digit), the first three digits were an *area code* and the fourth digit was the first digit of the c/o code, in the fourteen-digit card number. However, this meant 'clearing out' any use of 0XX or 1XX 'pseudo' central office codes in valid NPA codes, which determined manually connected ring-down points. Also, to avoid customer confusion (is everyone already confused?) with (most of) Mexico and the northwest border towns, AT&T and Mexico decided to eliminate the 903 code, and renumber the border towns to conform with Mexico's internal numbering/dial plan, using Telefonos de Mexico assigned city codes beginning with '6', which covered a much region of northwestern Mexico. For customer dialing to now a much larger part of Mexico's northwest, but if that customer didn't have IDDD, AT&T did something similar to what it had already done for Mexico City. They assigned NANP 'area code' 70-6, which hadn't been used prior. This was accomplished in late 1980. Calls to Mexico's (+52)-6N-XX-XXXX or (+52)-6NX-X-XXXX could be permissively dialed by everyone (including those who didn't have IDDD) as: 1/0+706-NXX-XXXX, which appeared to be a valid NANP number. (More recently, use of 90-5 and 70-6 as permissive 'NANP-like' area codes was discontinued in 1991, as 706 was assigned to the split of 404 in Georgia in 1992, and 905 was assigned to the split of 905 in Ontario in 1993.) All of the manual ring-down non-dial points all over Mexico using 903-XXX codes were also 'cleared out' of 903. Since the 88X codes had already been used for billing purposes for 'automated' Mexico, circa 1978, it was decided to use the 88X codes for indicating billing on a manually operator handled call to non-dialable locations, physically in the NANP (US, Alaska, Hawaii, Canada, Caribbean) as well as such locations in Mexico. A six-digit code of the 88X-XXX format was used. The second triplet of three digits could be assigned from a pool of all one-thousand possible combinations, including 0XX and 1XX, again as these codes were *not* dialable nor network routing, but *strictly* used for billing identification. There was no real rhyme nor reason to the assignment, except that: 881-XXX, 882-XXX, 883-XXX, 885-XXX for identifying billing to non-dialable locations in Mexico (I hadn't seen use of any 884's in recent times) 886-XXX, 887-XXX, 888-XXX, 889-XXX for identifying billing to non-dialable locations in the US/Canada/Caribbean. 880 doesn't seem to have been used, neither. Non-dialable points in overseas countries are handled as *international* calls, and billing identification is done differently. The reason for specific codes to identify each and every non-dialable operator handled manually connected location is due to distance-based billing, based on V&H co-ordinates, for such points in the NANP as well as in Mexico. This billing identification format is still being maintained. However, interchangeable NPA codes (NNX format) began to be used in 1995, and also when the industry forums decided to use 888 for the new special dialable area code for additional toll-free numbers, there was a concern about the use of existing 'pseudo' NPA codes of the NNX format (i.e. 88X and 52X). All ring-down points identified for billing as 888-XXX would now be in conflicting with the use of toll-free 888-NXX-XXXX numbers. Likewise, the use of 881 as a replace-code for "caller-pays" 888 would conflict with ring-down points identified for billing as 881-XXX. It has been decided by the INC (Industry Numbering Committee) to eventually *eliminate* the use of 'pseudo' NPA codes for non-dialable and/or billing functions. However, the OBF (Ordering & Billing Committee) still needs to use such codes, without any conflicting dialable uses of these numerical codes. There doesn't seem to have been any ring-down points identified for billing by 880, therefore there was no conflict with using 880 as a replace-code for "caller-pays" 800. (I also don't think that any ring-down points were identified by 884). But 881-XXX and 888-XXX codes used to identify ring-down points have had to be moved into other 88X ranges. Presently, Bellcore NANPA has 882 'reserved' as a general purpose dialable area code for future use, and 884 'reserved' for dialable area code use in a specific geographic relief region (although we don't yet know *which* area it is 'reserved' for). The 88X codes for 'ring-down' billing purposes have been presently moved (as far as I know) to use 887 and 889. I don't know what the present status of current or future use of 883, 885, nor 886 are. Pat (and all), I *KNOW* that this has been quite long, but I am trying to cover all bases, as numbering covers a *lot* of areas - customer dialing, operator dialing, network routing and switching functions, and various aspects of billing/rating/accounting. And when anything is proposed in one area, it can, and usually does, affect one or more other functions. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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, 18 Nov 1996 06:11:06 EST From: Derek Balling Subject: Telco Loophole Exempts ISP's From Fees? Pat and readers, I work for an Internet Service Provider in the midwest and received a very interesting piece of junk mail from a company that purports to know of a loophole in Telecom law which presumably exempts ISP's from paying (my guess here is) the Interstate Subscriber Line Charge. Having previously worked for a LEC I was not aware of this loophole, and cannot find any evidence of it by digging about on the FCC site. (Although granted, digging around the FCC site without knowing EXACTLY what you're looking for appears to be a hopeless cause, since none of the filenames are meaningful, and EVERY file seems to bring back a hit on "internet" since every file lists "internet file name: xxxxx" If anyone else out there is aware of this (and can vouch for its validity or lack thereof) I would really appreciate it. Included below is the body of the message we received. ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Return-Path: bayerle@avalon.imagixx.net Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 16:22:07 -0500 From: "Martin G. Bayerle" Subject: Telcos Owe ISPs Exemption Refunds IMPORTANT. Check your phone bills for your dedicated modem lines. If you're paying the same rate for both your voice and modem lines, then you're probably paying a federal "Access Charge" (or equivalent) on your modem lines. If that's the case, your telephone company owes you money ... Press Release November 15, 1996 Telcos Cry Ouch as They Return Millions in Overcharges to ISPs Morgantown, WV - The Internet Development & Exchange Association (IDEA) announced today that they were pursuing the telephone companies for millions of dollars in overcharges collected from Internet Service Providers (ISP) nationwide. "We anticipate that the total overcharges which the RBOCs will return to the ISP industry will be somewhere between four and thirty million dollars, and the savings to ISPs, while the exemption remains in place, can be into the hundreds of millions of dollars in the future. Although the small to medium sized ISPs are exempt from certain tariffs - exemptions taken by AT&T, AOL, MSN and Compuserve and others - smaller ISPs are often not aware of their applicable exemptions," said Martin Bayerle, Executive Director of IDEA. In 1983, the U.S. government exempted companies who provide access to the national network of computers from certain fees imposed by the RBOCs. "Unfortunately, the telephone companies' business offices are often unaware of the exemption, and the smaller ISP, as a consequence, gets charged. The larger ISPs and their phalanx of lawyers know about the exemptions; the smaller ones often do not," Mr. Bayerle said. This pattern of overcharges came to light in May, when IDEA initiated its member audit program. IDEA has already retrieved thousands of dollars in refunds for its membership. IDEA is the Internet industry's trade association. Exemptions would be retroactive to 1983, with some ISPs collecting as much as $100,000 or more in refunds from the telcos. The Association will assist IDEA members in the refund process. How to Get Your Refund IDEA provides the necessary federal citations to its members (at their Members Only section), should members wish to pursue the refund on their own. If you are not an IDEA member and would like to join, membership fees are, currently, waived for bona fide ISPs; you can join today for free. If you want IDEA to process your refund for you (their fee is 15%), then follow the procedure at the IDEA website: http://www.auidea.org [sig file deleted] ----- END OF FORWARDED MESSAGE --- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, for goodness sake, someone explain what is going on here. If this is true, and refunds are due, some people should be very, very pleased. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dehoog@super.zippo.com (John De Hoog) Subject: Internet By Cable - The Down Side Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 23:16:02 GMT Organization: Zippo Reply-To: dehoog@super.zippo.com After using a cable Internet service for nearly three months, I'm having them pull the plug and going back to ISDN. Many of the reasons are no doubt peculiar to the service here in Tokyo that I was using; but others may be more or less common to cable Internet. There were definitely some good things about the service -- solid connections on optical fiber lines, a good backbone to the U.S., and relatively few other customers at this stage competing for the servers. Here are the main problems that might be relevant to other cable services. (1) No way of accessing email from other locations. For some reason, the cable operator decided not to provide alternative ways of connecting (by telephone lines), meaning I can use the service from home but not from the office. Moreover, they chose the security option of not allowing email to be accessed through other providers. (2) No rate competition. Since cable operators in Tokyo still have virtual monopolies in their service areas, there is little incentive for them to lower their rates. As a result, the service was overpriced. (3) Poor Usenet service. Again, this relates to the lack of competition. As the only cable Internet service in this area (and in Japan right now), the company is under little pressure to improve such services as Usenet feeds. Other things to be considered when signing up for a cable Internet service -- The initial installation costs are high. And unlike ISDN, they are specific to the cable operator. With ISDN (and of course PSTN), you can use the same facilities even if you switch providers. Not so with cable. When you tie up with a cable operator, you are making an expensive commitment. Even if you use the same operator for TV services, the Internet equipment is separate and extra cost. Fortunately, we have a wide choice of providers here who offer ISDN connections. And in another few months the local phone company will be offering fast connections on a connectionless network specifically devoted to the Internet, called OCN. I hope to report on that development next year. John De Hoog dehoog@super.zippo.com ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: BellSouth's "Own" Payphone Breaks FCC Rules Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 02:48:22 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com It appears that while COCOTs are getting "better" with respect to long distance access, handling of new NPAs, etc., that BellSouth has lowered itself to the "COCOT" level (as Mark Cuccia recently pointed out.) Now, BellSouth has even broken FCC equal-access regulations on one of its "own" phones! The phone in question is a "Charge-a-call" phone located at the Tennessee welcome center on I-24 about five miles southwest of downtown Chattanooga. The phone is not the standard "Charge-A-Call" blue housing with handset/keypad offset to the right; it's a *standard WECO payphone housing* with no coin return lever and covered-up coin slot and coin return! The top instruction card states "only" "Charge-A-Call" (label made with a Dymo label maker); the standard BellSouth out-of-change/IXC card (and coin box cover) is at the bottom. From experience, a "Charge-A-Call" phone should allow any "operator-assisted" or "deferred payment" numbers, that is: * 0(#)/00(#) / 10[1x]xxx+0(0)(#) for local and IXC operators * (10[1x]xxx)+0+NPA+number (including 0-500) * (10[1x]xxx)+01+country+city+number (international) * 800/888/950 numbers * Bell "free" numbers (in Tennessee, the 557 prefix) * 1-411 (no charge for local DA in Tennessee!) * 911 (of course) Calls dialed as 1+ (aside from 800/888), 011+, or 7/10-digit numbers (aside from 950 and Bell 557) aren't allowed (since there's no provision for coins!) However, this phone would NOT allow 800/888/950 numbers, dialing of 0 or 00 for an LEC or AT&T operator respectively, the Bell "free" 557 numbers, or 01+ for international operator-assisted calls. It would ONLY allow calls dialed in the format below (I didn't check 911 for obvious reasons): * (10[1x]xxx)+0+NPA+number ALL other calls (including 800/888/950, and dialing 0#/00) went to the following recording: " You have placed your call from a telephone which has calling restrictions, or dialed a number which cannot be reached." It seems some switch tech blocked everything not dialed as 0+NPA+number in the switch itself! This means that non-LEC/AT&T calling cards could NOT be used from this phone (since virtually all carriers OTHER than AT&T use 800/888 access numbers; I know with at least MCI and LCI, I canNOT use their PIC code -- I have to use their 800 number for card calls) ... which I interpret as "FCC violation" -- "denying equal LD carrier access." Puzzled by this odd behavior, I called BellSouth's coin repair line (1-888-233-3456) and let them know this was happening. The repair rep said she hadn't heard of this before; she said (after I threatened to contact the FCC) that she'd have someone look into this. The phone number was not on the phone; I gave her the address, exchange (Chattanooga St. Elmo), etc. and she said she still could find the phone's record. I've already seen one Bell payphone that didn't allow 888 numbers (that phone has since been fixed) ... I'm afraid that even more problems will turn up with BellSouth's payphones (and "charge-a-call" phones) now that they've "COCOT-ized" them -- more problems with new area codes, prefixes, etc. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 12:28:56 GMT From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Spinning the Web" by Ford BKPSNWEB.RVW 960726 "Spinning the Web", Andrew Ford, 1995, 1-850-32141-8 %A Andrew Ford %C 115 Fifth Ave., New York, NY 10003 %D 1995 %G 1-850-32141-8 %I International Thomson Computer Press/VNR %O +1-212-254-3232 fax: +1-212-254-9499 %P 227 %T "Spinning the Web: How to Provide Information on the Internet" Ford's book is a short, serviceable, reference style guide to HTML. Although brief in length it is broad in scope, covering a number of often missed topics regarding server maintenance and administration, as well as security. Those with responsibility for more than a "see my picture on the Web!" page would find this worthwhile. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKPSNWEB.RVW 960726 Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@freenet.victoria.bc.ca link to virus, book info at http://www.freenet.victoria.bc.ca/techrev/rms.html Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #621 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 18 12:31:13 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA05186; Mon, 18 Nov 1996 12:31:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 12:31:13 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611181731.MAA05186@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #622 TELECOM Digest Mon, 18 Nov 96 12:31:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 622 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Guam Directory Assistance (Mark J. Cuccia) Bell Atlantic/NYNEX Begins CID Delivery on Cell Calls (Richard Ondrovic) Two Numbers, Two Service Providers on One Pair - Possible? (David Kay) Turkmenistan Country Code 993 to be Activated From Canada (David Leibold) Police Warn of Sweepstakes Phone Scam (Tad Cook) Nuisance Calls From Newspaper (Bob Schwartz) E&M Signalling Interface (Raymond Greenfield) Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA (Stanley Cline) Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! (oldbear@arctos.com) Re: BellSouth's Own New 'COCOTs' (Dave Levenson) Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line (Michael Ellis) Money Talks (Steve Hayes) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 18 Nov 1996 09:04:01 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Guam Directory Assistance On Sunday afternoon (4:35 pm Central Time; 8:35 am Monday morning in Guam), I finally decided to dial: 011+671+KLondike-5-1212+'#' I'd always wondered if/how this would work, particularly now that Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands will be 'joining' the NANP next year. Both of these US Pacific Territories, as well as American Samoa, have been using 'standard' NANP dialing/numbering procedures for quite some time now. In the list of Guam/CNMI central-office codes I posted to the Digest a few weeks ago, there wasn't anything about '555' in either. But I thought I would try dialing it anyhow. After about two-seconds after the '#' (pound symbol) to indicate end-of-dialing (so as to eliminate an additional three-to-five second wait for 'time-out' if no more digits are dialed), I 'cut-thru' out of my own central office switch, and then another two seconds of silence (there *NO* degradation of audio/transmission quality), I heard 'standard North American ESS-type ringing tone' for about twenty seconds. Eventually, a woman answered "Guam Directory, what listing?" I asked for the main business office number of the Guam Telephone Authority. She said to "Please hold for the number", and I heard an auto-quote of "The number is, 646-2100. Please make a note of this. Repeat, 646-2100. Thank you for calling", and then had a 'forced disconnect supervision' from GTA, through AT&T, to my own BellSouth switch. I did not get connected to any "AT&T Directory Link", but Guam is still not yet 'officially' integrated into the NANP network. I tried reaching CNMI's directory using the same method (011+670+555-1212) using several carriers (AT&T, MCI, Sprint), and all of them failed. Attempts to reach directory in American Samoa (Country Code +684, which may or may not join the NANP using Country Code +1 and the digits of their existing country code as their NANP area code 684) as 011+684+555-1212 also failed with all three 'major' carriers. I didn't try dialing anything in any of the other US/UN regions of the Pacific, all presently using +6XX country codes. Now, as for billing ... I am on one of AT&T's discount plans for both domestic calls and for international calls. Guam (as well as CNMI and American Samoa) aren't yet billed as 'domestic' type calls from the US. We've been told that this will happen in August of 1997. Using an AT&T Operator to call directory in points outside of the NANP will cost something like $5.00 (ouch)! Direct dialed calls to interstate/Canada/Caribbean KL.5-1212 directory in the (current) NANP, via AT&T, costs anywhere between 85-cents and $1.05. Calls to Guam at the time-of-day I placed the call cost about $1.45 (I'm probably a few pennies off) for the first minute, but with my discount plan, it would cost between 75-cents and 80-cents. I'll have to check my bill next month. I've heard that some carriers 'goof-up' translations regarding domestic and international calls. (Remember the problem Jean-Francois Meizi described recently on a call to his Montreal +1-514 number which was billed to a New Zealand Telecom Card.) I've heard stories that *answered/suped and billed* calls to local numbers 555-xxxx in other countries (which is *NOT* going to be a directory number, except probably for Guam) have resulted in a 'directory' charge rather than an international charge. Some carriers have had billing/translation errors on calls to Syndey Australia (+61-2-etc) show up on the bill as a call to Minneapolis MN (NPA 612 in the NANP, +1), and *billed* as such! :) ; as well as vice-versa! :( And there are numerous other NPA vs. country code translation errors which could be listed as well. As for Guam/CNMI, I understand that they will be able to completely participate in NANP numbering and dialing resources, and probably are doing so already. The Fg.B (950-xxxx) and Fg.D (10(1X)XXX+) codes are available to them *from the same common pool* that the US *and* Canada (and Caribbean?) presently *share* from. Guam and CNMI will also be able to completely share in the toll-free NANP 800/888 database as well. I would assume that Mariana Islands will also be providing inward 670-555-1212 directory as well, but I don't know if it will begin after, or at the time, they officially join-in with the rest of the NANP, or at some time just before. And regarding Guam and CNMI (and Ameerican Samoa), I still have no further information regarding any LATA codes, RAO codes, (Bellcore-TRA) Operating Company Numbers (aka NECA Company Codes), V&H Co-ordinates, nor CLLI codes. Also, I *did* go to the 'genuine-LEC' (GTA) inward directory when I dialed 011+671-KL.5-1212, rather than some 'third-party directory provider which AT&T has contracted out to'. Also, I don't know if the dialing method will work to reach Guam Directory from non-US parts of the NANP, nor even from outside of the NANP as well. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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: ondrovic@netbox.com (Richard Ondrovic) Subject: Bell Atlantic/NYNEX Begins CID Delivery on Outgoing Cell Calls Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 13:09:32 GMT As of Saturday, November 16, Bell Atlantic/NYNEX is now delivering CID information on outgoing cell calls. I verified this today by calling my home from my cell phone. The cell phone number was displayed on the CID box along with the city and state in which it is registered. ------------------------------ From: David Kay Subject: Two Numbers, Two Service Providers on One Pair - Is It Possible? Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 23:23:01 -0800 Organization: scruz-net Reply-To: davidk@usa.net When Pac Bell came to my place recently to install a new phone line for my tenant they told me there were no more available wire pairs in the street so they would be installing a multiplexing device (Damel) to allow two phone lines at my place to share an existing pair. Now I've received an offer from MCI Home Phone to take over as my dialtone service provider -- I'll skip the details of their offer. So at this point I'm wondering how I could accept the MCI offer to become the service provider for one half of a multiplexed pair of wires. It sounds dubious from a technical standpoint -- but I'm not an expert. Any experts here have the answer to this question? David Kay ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 15:58:02 GMT From: David Leibold Subject: Turkmenistan Country Code 993 to be Activated From Canada Stentor (Canadian group of telcos) submitted a tariff notice 367 which indicates that service to Turkmenistan through country code 993 is proposed to take effect 29 November 1996. This application establishes separate call rates for Turkmenistan (from CAD$2.91 to $3.87 for initial minute, depending on day of week/time of day.) Until the new country code takes effect, Turkmenistan is dialable via country code 7, a holdover from the former USSR system. These are details in effect for Canada; details on when other countries will establish country code 993 are not known. Information found on CRTC website http://www.crtc.gc.ca/. David Leibold aa070@freenet.toronto.on.ca ------------------------------ Subject: Police Warn of Sweepstakes Phone Scam Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 06:17:12 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Police Warn of Sweepstakes Phone Scam RENO, Nev. (AP) -- Reno police warned residents on Friday of a telephone scam in which a caller identifies himself as a representative of American Family Publishers. The warning came after Dee Kretzmeier, 86, told police she received a call from a man who said she was a $100,000 sweepstakes winner. But Kretzmeier became suspicious when she was told that to avoid paying 33 percent of the prize money in taxes, she needed to pay $7,000 up front and before she would receive the remaining $93,000 in prize money. Kretzmeier did not send any money but did call police, who said an investigation showed the caller was not associated with American Family Publishers. Authorities in Reno added that similar schemes across the country have resulted in individual losses ranging from $2,000 to $7,000. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I really feel at times that news like the above is hardly worth printing in the papers or elsewhere. Do people *still* fall for all those old scams? I guess they do. I got one of those pitches directed to me once and my response was to fax them back a message saying 'you have my written authority to deduct all required fees to be paid in advance from my winnings and then remit proceeds.' Of course I signed it so they would have my authority to make all required deductions. ... that was not the answer they expected to receive. I got in the mail today a note from someone commenting on the little item printed here last week saying 'telemarketer indicted' and pointing out that it was really unfair to paint all telemarketers with the same very broad brush. I agree, it is unfair. While anyone can pick up the phone and try to con someone else out of money (look at me for example; I stay on the phone for hours at a time each day trying to get all of you to send me $20 each year) at least telemarketers do have something of value for the money they are requesting. There may be, and are some problems with questionable operating procedures/practices, but they are legitimate. Con artists who call up people geting them to send money as described above are not telemarketers by any stretch of the imagination 'telemarketers' and should bot be referred to as such. I think on the article published here last week, I should have changed the title. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bob@BCI.NBN.com (Bob Schwartz) Subject: Nuisance Calls From Newspaper Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 07:04:29 GMT Organization: BCI Last Friday I got several calls from people wanting me to get the area newspaper. Each time I asked to be taken off the "call list". The last caller stated that she would take me off the "list" but that other telemarketing firms had been hired by the same newspaper and that I may still be called by another telemarketing company with the same or similar offer. Can anyone advise me of what's right in this situation. Oh yes, I've got several lines and allready recieve the paper so I don't qualify for the promotion they're offering. Bob Schwartz Consulting, Auditing, Optimization Bill Correctors, Inc. Contract Negotiations, Research, & More. P.O. Box 316 Quality Services and Solutions Since 1983. Woodacre, CA 94973-0316 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John Higdon is a veteran in the same 'war'; he may possibly want to share his experiences. My suggestion is you should go back to the prime source -- the newspaper itself -- and get on their case about it. When hiring those various contractors the newspaper is reponsible for maintaining a 'do not call' list. PAT] ------------------------------ From: raymondg@talktech.co.nz (Raymond Greenfield) Subject: E&M Signalling Interface Date: 18 Nov 1996 01:14:00 GMT Organization: Talking Technologies I am looking for a "box" which I can drive with a PC Serial Port which will read and set the E&M leads of multiple four-wire E&M circuits. Preferably 19" rack mount case and preferably with isolation between the E&M circuits and the PC ports. I will be taking care of the audio via DSP's in the PC it's only the signalling I need to control. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Richard Ballard talktech@wave.co.nz ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Sprint Spectrum/PacBell PCS Rollouts in CA Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 02:48:14 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com > 4. Other GSM carriers who are currently active: Powertel which has > several cities in the southeast in what is called "soft launch" which > means the network is up and running with a limited number of Powertel is not operating in the Atlanta/Chattanooga MTA yet; they *have* started operation in the Memphis/Jackson[TN|MS] and Birmingham MTAs. (The Atlanta MTA is so large and sprawled out that it will take a fairly long time before it goes online.) The major thorn in the side of GSM PCS in Tennessee is Nashville. Chattanooga, Memphis, and Knoxville [BSDCS] all have GSM carriers either up now, or coming soon, but Nashville and middle Tennessee will have no GSM for the foreseeable future (according to the GSM organization's maps.) CellularOne already has a virtual lock on "statewide" roamers in Tennessee {even though BellSouth Mobility and US Cellular finally lowered roaming rates to "home airtime" -- and their coverage isn't even "statewide"!) -- I expect the situation to stay the same. Worse: In Atlanta, it appears that InterCel, PowerTel's parent company, will operate both PCS and the [current] B-side cellular system in the Newnan area, which is a landline local call from Atlanta but is NOT with BellSouth Mobility. If PowerTel allows Atlanta<->Newnan calls as "local" (as all other involved carriers do) I can see a large lawsuit between InterCel and BellSouth, or else BellSouth buying the Newnan area [only] from InterCel. (Currently, BellSouth/Atlanta customers must pay 95c/min + long distance for calls WITHIN THEIR LOCAL LANDLINE CALLING AREA; this has been a MAJOR problem for BellSouth in the Atlanta market. InterCel's, AirTouch's, and Blackwater Cellular's customers -- and BellSouth's ALABAMA customers -- have no such problem.) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 12:10:39 -0500 Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) writes: > Monty Solomon contributed the following: >> After a few of these unexplained crashes, one of our MIS group noticed >> that every time he went in to the server room to reboot the dead >> servers, one of the AT&T engineers was using his mobile phone. So, >> they were asked to turn their phones off while working in the server >> room, and the problem has not reoccurred. >> To test the theory a bit further, the MIS group then took an otherwise >> unused server, and experimented with using a mobile phone near >> it. With the working phone being used less than a foot away from the >> machine, they provoked a crash which corrupted the system disk (and >> its mirror volume) beyond repair. > My GSM phone used to work really well at moving the serial mouse > connected to my laptop whenever it was transmitting; it didn't crash it > though. This is really scary ... especially in the scenario of a naive GSM user activating GSM phone on an aircraft or in an medical environment. Anyone know if this is being / has been discussed in the RISKS newsgroup? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if anyone has looked at that possibility where TWA Flight 800 was concerned, or in the situation where the two airplanes which collided over India last week? GSM is common enough in many parts of the world after all; isn't it possible that a GSM phone might have been accidentally left turned on with resulting problems in the navigation of the aircraft? PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: BellSouth's Own New 'COCOTs' Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 23:06:49 GMT Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > IMO, COCOTs should have been allowed the *opportunity* to 'upgrade' to > telco switch-based coin service, rather than the other way around. As Mark correctly explained elsewhere in his very complete article, the telcos are required to offer coin-service lines to COCOT operators if they offer them to their own payphone division. It appears that BellSouth has chosen to discontinue coin-service lines entirely, rather than offering them to its competitors. My understanding of the FCC's Payphone Report and Order (the FCC's interpretation of the payphone provisions of the Telecom Act of '96) is that they must either offer them to all, or not use them at all. In areas where the telco offers coin-control lines to COCOT-operators, it will be interesting to see which way the COCOT-operators go. Will the extra cost of a coin line offset the lower cost of the dumb payphone? Will the COCOT operators still have the option of pricing sent-paid calls below the prices charged by the LEC phones? > ... Now, every time a new NPA code is assigned, as well a new > (NPA)-NXX local area central office code assigned, or there are any > changes in dialing instructions, etc., *each and every* payphone is > going to have to have its chips loaded in with the new numbering, > dialing, routing and billing/rating information ... COCOT-operators have lived with this requirement for years. At Westmark, we update the rate-and-route data in each phone monthly. (We download it via the modem and burn it into EEPROM in the phone.) A new NXX code gets loaded into the phones about one month before the first subscriber numbers are assigned to the exchange. A new NPA gets into our phones in time for the permissive use date. > There *should* be a 'datalink', *separate from the voiceloop*, for > upgrades and modifications (via modem) to the tables and software inside > the chips. Perhaps when payphones are served by ISDN lines, we'll be able to update them while they're in use. For now, we live within the technology we're offered ... and we do our modem telemetry between 03:00 and 04:00 daily. Where incoming service is offered (where permitted by local ordinance, and requested by the location provider) we program the modem to answee after ten rings during business hours, and on the first ring between 03:00 and 04:00. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: s9607948@westgate.vut.edu.au (Michael Ellis) Subject: Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line Organization: Victoria University of Technology Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:38:27 GMT David Clayton (dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au) wrote: > msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) contributed the following: >> Larry English (lenglish@atlanta.nsc.com) writes: >>> Suddenly a new feature has appeared on my residential phone line. >>> I noticed that if I'm talking to someone, I can "flash" the hookswitch, >>> make another call [without disconnecting the first call], and then ... >> Pat responds: >>> It is known as 'Three Way Calling' and some telcos have begun >>> offering it on a 'per-use' basis as well as by monthly subscription. >> Here in Bell Canada land, if you buy three-way calling by the month, >> it works as Larry describes. But if you don't subscribe and want to >> use it, then you have to dial *71. This eliminates the hazard that >> people unaware of having the service might use it accidentally and >> incur the pay-per-use charge, as Larry has probably done. > Just out of interest, in Australia the dominant carrier, Telstra, > recently provided "Call Waiting" for free to all customers on > compatible exchanges. Yeah, but what good is that? I'm not on a compatible exchange ... which means I have to wait until November 1998, a long time. Also, the only reason it is provided free is because of competition from Optus (secondary carrier). And also we have about one tenth of the services available to use compared to, say, the standard US residential phone service. > Since all answered calls cost money here, the telco finally figured > out that they get no revenue for busy tone, but with call waiting in > use they get a hell of a lot more answered calls, and therefore > revenue, for a minor loss in monthly rental, and the customers think > that they are getting something for nothing! BeMike (Michael Ellis) E-Mail: s9607948@westgate.vut.edu.au Mobile: +61 419 588 262 (0419 588 262) ------------------------------ Date: 18 Nov 96 10:58:04 EST From: Steve Hayes <100112.606@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Money Talks A couple of nights back, there was a television program on here (UK) about the financial dealings in the City of London. Some of this might be of interest to TELECOM Digest readers. They were talking about the massive global markets in currency speculation, etc. that have developed in recent years. One of the traders they spoke to recalled how expensive international phone calls were 20 years ago. He remembered the first such call he made and how he had to have approval from the higher-ups to make it. Now, he remarked, they have open lines going all over the place. Another individual trader was carrying out his business from home using computers and a satellite link. Apparently he had gone to France last year for 6 weeks, took his computers and dish with him and continued his trading without interruption. The high point though was a visit to a new trading floor that Chase Manhattan are building in London. A huge place with many dozens of trading desks. We saw where the network equipment is going in to support them. Racks of flashing Ethernet boxes and a thicket of yellow optical fibre cables. There are 80000 fibre terminations in the building. Each trading desk has connectivity to support 600 phone calls, though with only two handsets (even "masters of the universe" only have two ears apiece, after all) I'm not sure why. Perhaps that was some sort of equivalent including the data capacity. The cost of this extravaganza is 60 million pounds (about $100 million). The clincher is what it will do for Chase Manhattan. They expect to gain an advantage over their competitors of TWO SECONDS in their trading activity. They expect to maintain this competitive edge for two years and obviously expect to make back that $100 million and more over that time. Glad I won't be there! I just wish I didn't have the feeling that I (and everyone else) will be the ones paying for it. Steve Hayes, Swansea, UK [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Of course you will be paying for it. Banks are like telcos in the sense that they do not pay for anything they can get their subscribers/customers to pay for instead. After all, why should the stockholders have to pay when things get bungled up? A creative person could think of a reason why it was the fault of the customers instead. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #622 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 19 12:50:59 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA02025; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:50:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:50:59 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611191750.MAA02025@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #623 TELECOM Digest Tue, 19 Nov 96 12:49:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 623 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Fax You Can Trust (Financial Times via hq@jfax.com) Split San Jose? (Tad Cook) ICFC Call For Papers (David Loomis) Toll Free Directory of Spammers (Jeff Colbert) Spam and a Good Use For Free Fridays (TELECOM Digest Editor) Spam With 800 Numbers (Dan Gillmor) Freemark Free Email Service - Advertisers Pay (jeffb@juno.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: hq@jfax.com (JFAX Personal Telecom) Subject: Fax You Can Trust Date: Mon, 18 Nov 96 16:31:18 GMT Organization: JFAX Personal Telecom FINANCIAL TIMES November 18, 1996 Fax You Can Trust By Time Jackson You have just set up in business on your own, and need to have your phone answered, have your mail opened and your faxes forwarded to you while you are on the road. You can't afford a secretary, so what do you do? Until recently, the only places where you could expect to find a "virtual office" offering these services were a few big cities the US. In places where the start-up culture is weaker, you had to rely on fax machines, answering machines and a willing friend or spouse to tend them in your absence. Earlier this year, however, a revolutionary new service was launched which delivers 80 per cent of a virtual office for 20 per cent of the price. It is called JFAX Personal Telecom, and it provides you with a phone cum-fax number to give to business contacts. When messages arrive, they are turned into e-mails and forwarded to you immediately across the Net, allowing you to pick up voice mails and faxes whenever you check your e-mail. What makes the service unusual is that it allows you to keep an ''office'' in a city you have never visited. For $12.50 (7.50) a month (plus 25 cents per message after the first 100), JFAX customers anywhere in the world can acquire local numbers in New York, London, San Francisco, Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Toronto or Boston. The parent of this brilliant idea is Jaye Muller, a 24-year-old rock musician born in East Berlin, who lost patience during a European tour in 1994 with the process of having faxes forwarded from hotel to hotel. After moving to New York he launched JFAX in May 1996 in partnership with his record producer, paying the start-up costs partly from the proceeds of a single that received a lot of play on MTV. The JFAX system in each city works by using a Unix server attached to the Net at one end and to a block of incoming lines at the other. With 30 incoming lines, the server has enough capacity to take incoming calls or faxes for 3,000 customers, each of whom is assigned a different, permanent dial-in number. Incoming voice mails are encoded using the GSM mobile telephony standard; faxes are converted into TIFF graphics format. The messages are then sent across the Net as e-mail attachments. With a standard fast modem and a dial-up connection to a Net service provider, the owner of the phone number can retrieve the messages in about the same time it took to leave them. Muller is already planning for expansion. New ''offices'' are set to open in Tokyo, Johannesburg, Paris, Hong Kong, Tel Aviv, Bombay, Beirut and elsewhere. At this week's Comdex computer trade fair in Las Vegas, the company will launch a service that catches up with other companies that allow customers to use e-mail to send faxes as well as receive. In a few weeks, the system will be ported to the World Wide Web, allowing people to check their voice mail and faxes from any Web-connected computer, such as in a colleague's office or in a cybercafe. Muller is planning to offer pager notification so that customers can be beeped when a message comes in, and also a voice gateway so they can dial in for voice messages from a public phone and have their faxes read to them by a computer. The company has also launched a program rather like Amazon.com's Affiliates, in which Web sites that forward new clients to JFAX receive a 5 per cent commission on revenues. So far, Muller says the company has funded its growth from cash flow, and has not spent a penny on advertising or marketing. It is not looking for venture capital. "We always want to have something else brought to the table," he says, "not just money". So where is the market for such a service? One possibility: globetrotters who want to keep in touch with friends. Another: small companies that want to look international or want to provide a local contact point for clients overseas. Some make the outgoing message on their JFAX number sound as though it is on a machine in a physical office that just happens to be unattended. A recent write-up in The New York Times cited the example of a clothes designer who moved from the US to South Africa, and used the JFAX service because his clients were reluctant to call him in Cape Town. The trouble with these markets is that American clothes designers in South Africa are few. The globetrotters have to find e-mail everywhere they go, which is expensive and difficult, unless you like CompuServe. And the small businesses occupy an odd no-man's-land: high-tech enough to be familiar with e-mail, not so high-tech that their clients are familiar with it, too. I don't think you could build a Netscape on this business model. But there is a third target market which could be very big: "road warriors" fed up with having to go through three separate processes to check voice mail, e-mail and faxes. JFAX is negotiating a deal with Texaco to equip hundreds of its sales people with unique fax-and-phone numbers in Houston. The system also offers a bonus for people in big companies who are fed up with waiting half a day for faxes to reach their desks. ------------------------------ Subject: Split San Jose? Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:08:14 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Plan to split phone area code in San Jose criticized By Dick Egner Mercury News Staff Writer The San Jose City Council, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and Pacific Bell oppose a plan to split the city into two area codes to help meet demand for more telephone numbers. But the opposition may not sway the California Public Utilities Commission. Earlier this month the council adopted a resolution urging the PUC to keep the part of Santa Clara County already in the 408 area code intact. The county board took similar action last month. Pacific Bell also favors a split along Santa Clara County borders over one that divides San Jose in the Willow Glen area along Hamilton and Pine avenues, said Joanne Collins, the Pac Bell code administrator who assigns prefixes in Northern California. It will recommend that plan in January to the PUC. But keeping most of Santa Clara County in the 408 code would mean running out of numbers in three to five years, according to Michelle McGurk, an aide to Councilman Frank Fiscalini, who represents the Willow Glen area. A split along Hamilton and Pine avenues would create enough workable numbers for five to seven years, McGurk said, and this could dominate the PUC's thinking. Area codes across the nation are running out of numbers, especially in California, because of the spread of cellular phones, computer modems, fax machines, pagers and other devices. The 510 area was split from the 415 area in 1991 and is projected to run out of phone numbers by the third quarter of 1998. If it were split, San Jose would join the Peninsula's Daly City and Brisbane, which are scheduled to be split. Those Peninsula cities will keep some residents in the 415 area code and change others to a new 650 area code. City government, along with businesses and offices throughout San Jose, would have difficulty conducting business with two area codes, critics say. McGurk points to the parks department and other municipal offices on the former Almaden Winery property on Blossom Hill Road. "Like some businesses, we have locations throughout the city," she said. If Pac Bell submits a recommendation in January, the PUC's decision could come in mid-1997. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 14:05:55 GMT From: David Loomis Subject: ICFC Call For Papers CALL FOR PAPERS The 15th Annual 1997 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS FORECASTING CONFERENCE (ICFC) Dynamic Market Structures & Evolving Customer Needs: The Role of Demand Analysis & Forecasting The Sir Francis Drake Hotel, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A. June 24 - 27, 1997 Hosted by Pacific Bell The International Communications Forecasting Conference is a professional forum for telecommunications forecasters, demand analysts, market researchers, product managers and planners. The ICFC provides the opportunity to hear state-of-the-art information and analysis of existing and emerging issues as they pertain to telecommunications forecasting and planning, demand analysis, market research and cost analysis. The theme of the 1997 conference is "Dynamic Market Structures & Evolving Customer Needs: The Role of Demand Analysis & Forecasting." As telecommunications technology advances rapidly and competition intensifies, the traditional governmental regulatory framework must evolve. Furthermore, 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. Finally, convergence has erased industry lines between communications, information and entertainment providers. Nevertheless, business planning and forecasting requirements 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, proliferation of new service introductions, increased national/international competition and blurred service distinction? The 1997 ICFC is the premier forum for discussion and debate of these issues as they relate to forecasting and demand analysis. The Conference will include plenary sessions, concurrent sessions and tutorials. It also hosts a Technology Showcase in which vendors of the latest forecasting, demand analysis, geodemographic and information management tools will display and demonstrate their products. Professionals and academics with expertise in telecommunications demand, market analysis, forecasting, product management, industry competition, technology changes 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 (preferred mode is e-mail) on or BEFORE MARCH 1, 1997 to: Bill H. Pennington Tel: 410-592-8621 Kasten & Associates Fax: same as above 13325-B Fork Road Baldwin, MD 21013, USA Internet e-mail: MVHL70A@PRODIGY.COM Abstracts will be reviewed by the conference Planning Committee and notification of acceptance will be given by MARCH 31, 1997. Allotted time for the presentation will be 20 minutes 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. PLEASE VISIT ICFC HOME PAGE AT http://www.econ.ilstu.edu/icfc/home.htm 1997 ICFC CALL FOR PAPERS TOPICS DEMAND & MARKET ANALYSIS: Access Demand for Local Services Optimal Calling Packages Rebalancing Impact Analysis Flat vs Usage based Local Services Own & Cross Price Elasticities Firm vs Market Elasticities New Product Introductions Local Number Portability Other related topics FORECASTING: New Products/Services Forecasting Market Survey & Forecasting Market Share Predictions Competitive Intelligence into Forecasts IntraLATA Toll Forecasting & Competition InterLATA Access Demand Forecasts International Forecasting Unbundling & Local Access Forecast Broadband & Bandwidth Forecasting Other related topics COMPETITION: Impact of Local Loop Competition Inter & IntraLATA Toll and Market Share Competition in the Local Loops among LEC,IXC,CATV & Cellular Simulation and Competition for Market Shares Resale of LEC Services War Gaming Other related topics REGULATORY & INDUSTRY DYNAMICS: Price Cap Viability Alternative Access Provision Resale of Local Services One-Stop Shopping IXC Entry to Local Services LEC Entry to InterLATA Services International Alliances Other related topics INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES: Internet Impact Video on Demand Rejuvenation of Twisted Pairs PCS/Cellular/Wireline Substitution Satellite Competition & Substitution Internet Telephony ADSL/HDSL/Cable Modems Coming/Passing ISDN Age SONET,AIN, ATM, FTTC,FTTH Network is the Solution Communications & Multimedia GIS Technology & Competition Wireless Data The ICFC also cosponsors three timely seminars. These seminars will be held prior to the 1997 ICFC. Those attending the seminars receive both a discount on the seminar and a discount on the conference registration fee. Customer Choice: Empirical Methods for Analysis & Forecasting by UC-Berkeley, June 23-24, 1997; $650 & $550 (joint participant). For more information, please contact: Professor Kenneth Train at (510) 642-6649 or e-mail him at 'train@econ.berkeley.edu', or Grace Katagiri at (510) 642-6724, e-mail at 'katagiri@econ.berkeley.edu' Home Page: http://elsa.berkeley.edu/eml/icfc.html Technology Forecasting for Telecom Industry by Technology Futures, Inc., June 22-24, 1997; $995 & $895 (joint participant). For more information, please contact at (800) 835-3887 or(512) 258-8898, e-mail: info@tfi.com, (fax) (512) 258-0087. Home Page: http://www.tfi.com Business Forecasting on the IBM PC by Business Forecasting Systems, Inc., June 22-24, 1997; $995 & $895(joint participant). For more information, please contact Eric Stellwagon at(617) 484-5050, (fax) 617-484-9219, e-mail: forecastpr@aol.com or 76773.1634@compuserve.com. Home Page: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/forecastpro REGISTRATION The early registration fee is US$745.00 before May 23, 1997. After May 23, 1997 the registration fee will be US$795.00. For attendance at both the 1997 ICFC and one of the preconference training seminars (listed above), the fee is US$695.00 if registering before May 23, 1997, and US$745.00 after May 23, 1997. Payment may be made by check, money order or credit card. To register for the Conference please contact Don Gorman as listed below. ICFC 1997 Attn: Don Gorman 204 Murray School Road Pottstown, PA 19465 USA Telephone: 610-469-0515, FAX 610-469-6626 Internet e-mail: don.gorman@worldnet.att.net If you have any questions regarding the Call for Papers and potential topics please contact: David Loomis 309-438-7979 FAX 309-438-5228 dloomis@ilstu.edu David G. Loomis Email: dloomis@ilstu.edu Illinois State University Voice: (309) 438-7979 Department of Economics FAX: (309) 438-5228 Campus Box 4200 Normal, IL 61790-4200 Web Site: http://odin.cmp.ilstu.edu/~dloomis/ ------------------------------ From: Jeff Colbert Subject: Toll Free Directory of Spammer's Numbers Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 11:36:36 -0600 Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc. Reply-To: jcolbert@earthlink.net (Passed along to the Digest FYI by Jeff) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It looks like others have adopted my suggestion that netizens reach out and touch their favorite spammers on a regular basis with phone calls. And now, some fine person has put together a handy directory of spammer's 800 numbers for your convenience. PAT] Forwarded from alt.hackers group... Subject: 800 numbers worth flaming Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 21:20:07 GMT From: fadden Organization: Lipless Rattling Crankbait Newsgroups: alt.flame, talk.bizarre, alt.sex, alt.hackers Followup-To: alt.flame Bored? Lonely? Feel the need to yell at someone, or just hear another person's voice? Call one of these numbers and let them know how you feel! number last sighting ====== ============= 800-677-1207 EXT.1734 96/11/16 800-677-1207 ext 2006 96/11/16 800-677-1207 ext.2049 96/11/16 800-677-1207 x1023 96/11/16 800-899-0035 ext 1000 96/11/16 800-935-5171 Ext.1395 96/11/16 800-995-0796 ext. 9737 96/11/16 800-995-0796 x6088 96/11/16 888-714-9100 Ext: 10314 96/11/16 888-714-9100 ext 10315 96/11/16 888-714-9100 x10296 96/11/16 (These keep showing up in my mailbox ... they're all advertisements for MLM or other junk I can live without.) Some important things to remember! (1) Act interested. Say a few words. If you don't, they may detect the absence of a message and drop you immediately, and you wouldn't want that. (2) Silence compression can save a lot of storage space. Music isn't silence. Treat them to some nice music after the first few seconds (you don't want to start it immediately, or the phone system might interpret the constant elevated sound level as noise and drop you). (3) Calling back 2 or 3 times is a sign of deep interest. Calling back 2 or 3 hundred times is a sign of attempting to waste their money. I know that's not what you want to do, and you don't want them to get the wrong impression, so switch to a different phone if you become attached to the lilting tones of someone's voice. (4) You'd be surprised how many calls you can make while eating dinner with your speakerphone turned down low! (5) Keep the list handy! You never know when you'll be near a pay phone and feel the need to hear that special someone. Together, we can show spam-advertisers just how warm and friendly the Internet really is! fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden) [These are strictly my opinions.] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those numbers Andy gives in his list all go to voicemail and you know how that works. If you accidentally press the * or # key on your phone while listening to their outgoing message you might inadvertently break into their system and cause their messages to get erased, etc. So be careful about not pressing the wrong keys. Yes indeed, let us show the spammers what a warm and friendly community we have here. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Nov 96 11:42:41 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Spam and a Good Use for Free Fridays [The following mail got munged somehow and I am sorry to report the sender's name and address is no longer available.] In the past, you have criticized Sprint and their "Free Fridays" plan. I have been quite happy with the plan and it has proved very useful in my educational program for spammers. On Fridays, my calls are free. So sending 40 or 50 pages of educational materials to a spammer's FAX number from my FAX modem seems like a useful tool. Maybe after reading these materials, they will be educated enough to find another line of business. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sorry I cannot provide a name and address on the above, but you know, the idea has a lot of merit. We have those cases like Cyber-Times in Toledo, Ohio where the company did not provide a toll-free number so you may want to provide your educational services and your welcome-wagon gifts every Friday to their fax machines, etc. Explain that you would like to do more, but cannot afford to call when you have to pay for it yourself. They long ago gave up on trying to have an email address; they are gradually learning that an 800 number is not very prudent either. Now, compliments of Sprint's Free Fridays, they may decide to turn their phone off entirely :) and crawl back under the rocks where they belong. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:03:26 PST From: Dan Gillmor Subject: Spam With 800 Numbers Re the Interramp thread: I find that more spam comes from them than anyone else. If they're trying to stop it they're not doing a very good job. Here's one where they've kindly included many 800 numbers. Dan Gillmor, Computing Editor E-mail: dgillmor@sjmercury.com San Jose Mercury News Voice: 408-920-5016 750 Ridder Park Drive Fax: 408-920-5917 San Jose, CA 95190 http://www.sjmercury.com/business/gillmor/ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 00:55:16 +0000 From:us045723@pop3.interramp.com To: b20199@aol.com, b20199@aol.com Subject: [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ooops! I accidentally erased most of the fine offers available, but I was able to save the phone numbers not already included in Andy's directory. PAT] TELEPHONE CHAT ROOMS - Better than Online! ->NO CREDIT CARD REQUIRED ! Call anytime: 1-(800)-209-5600 [TD Editor: Caution! This one will 'flip' the billing on you and put the charge to your phone number at $2.99 per minute, compliments of Pilgrim Telephone. Be careful with it. PAT] >>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>> Pharmacist Says: "Don't Take Pills!" You can't absorb enough Vitamins, Minerals, Pycnogenol, Colloidal Minerals or Melatonin with Pills. FREE INFO: Get 95% Absorption w/Miracle Organic Products Call DAVE - Former Pharmacist 813-948-1998 >>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>><<<<<>>>>> [TD Editor: This one needs an educational program every Friday via Sprint. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jeffb@juno.com Subject: Freemark Free Email Service - Advertisers Pay Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 11:23:25 EST [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now this would seem to be a much more palatable way for people to advertise 'on the net' if that is what they think they want to do. I am not at all convinced that there is any way to make money by doing business on the Internet, but for the people who think there is, then they might want to consider what this company is doing. They will give you a free email account if you are willing to read advertising messages which appear on your screen in the process of sending and receiving email. It is not clear to me if the advertising messages which will be shown to the subscribers of Freemark will be sent along with the email their subscribers send out, and I hope that is not the case. I suspect Freemark is looking for **legitimate businesses* to advertise with them; not the MLM/Make Money Fast crowd we currently see all over the net. Personally, I doubt any of the flakes we see on the net could afford the prices Freemark will charge, but I do not know anything about their rates or terms of service where advertisers are concerned. Freemark does not say how they intend to deal with spammers who latch onto them and use their free service as a way to send out their own ads to the rest of us. I hope Freemark will take a firm stand against 'freeloading' advertisers who use them as a cheap (hey, how much cheaper can you get than free?) way to mailbomb the rest of us. Time will tell. If after reading their message below you want more information about advertising via their free email accounts, their corporate office is in Massachusetts at 617-492-6600. PAT] --------- Begin forwarded message ---------- From: join@freemark.com To: jeffb@juno.com Subject: Freemark Signup form Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 17:01:16 -0500 Message-ID: <199611152201.RAA20085@stonewall.freemark.com> Thank you for your message regarding FREEMARK MAIL! Below, we have included some general information about Freemark Mail. At the bottom of this message is an Application Form. You may skip straight to this section if you already know what benefits Freemark Mail has to offer you as an email service. If you have any other questions regarding Freemark Mail please call 1-888-MY-EMAIL and one of our representatives will be happy to assist you. If you already have a copy of our software and need technical assistance please call our support team at 1-800-881-1750. FREEMARK Freemark Mail is a FREE email service that is available to anyone in the United States with a PC and a modem. Freemark is ideal for people who are both experienced computer users and beginners. In about 10 minutes, your Freemark Mail will be up and running and you can start sending mail to your family and friends worldwide, at no charge! We will provide you with all the software and the connections that you need. It makes no difference what online service your recipient uses, as long as they have an Internet email address. To connect to Freemark, an estimated 95% of the population will dial into the service with a no-charge local phone call. There are no monthly charges, and there are no limitations on your email use. You can use Freemark Mail as many times as you like without paying provider fees. Freemark is an advertiser sponsored service like TV and Radio. When you send and receive mail with Freemark, advertising will appear at the bottom of your screen. However, you will only receive ads that are of interest to you and you choose which ads you want to see. Freemark will NEVER sell or trade your name, address or any personal information to anyone including our advertisers. You decide if you want to release your name or not. To RECEIVE Freemark Mail: Call our toll-free number: 1-888-MY-EMAIL Visit our website: www.freemark.com Fill out the application form below and return to Freemark by email. We will ship you our software within 2 weeks. If you have already signed up for Freemark and not yet received your disks please call 1-888-MY-EMAIL and we will expedite your software. To use Freemark Mail you will need a Windows PC which is at least a 386 running Win 3.1 or higher and a 9600 (or higher) modem. Freemark is not available at this time for the Mac but we will be looking into developing a Mac version in the future. You must be resident in the United States to use Freemark Mail. Thank you for contacting Freemark. We look forward to seeing you online with us very soon! FREEMARK APPLICATION FORM To be assured of receiving further information about Freemark Mail, follow these instructions: 1. Reply to this message, using the "include message" function of your email interface. 2. Edit the body of the message to fill out the form. Please put your answers on the same line. For example, if the form asks: Favorite Color: you want your message to look like: Favorite Color: red and *not*: Favorite Color: red 3. Double-check to make sure your information is correct. 4. Send the message! You should receive a reply from our automated registrar service telling you we've received your form. Thanks! FreeMark Mail Registrar ---Form begins here--- Vital Statistics First Name: MI: Last Name: Address1: Address2: City: State: Zip: Male or Female (M/F): Age: Marital Status (single/married): Children at Home? (Y/N): Which best describes your occupation?: Professional: Technical: Executive/Managerial/Sales: Government/Military: Administrative: Other Occupation: Contact Information Phone #: Fax #: E-mail address where you can receive mail -- Please include your full e-mail address, for example: webmaster@freemark.com Primary: Secondary: Preferred form of contact (email/phone): Best time to call: Computer Stats Type of computer: 286: 386: 486: Pentium: Mac II: Performa: Quadra: PowerMac: Video display: Monochrome: 16 color: 256 color: Other Video: Operating System: Windows 3.1: Windows for Workgroups: Windows95: Pre-System 7.1: System 7.1: System 7.5: OS/2: Unix: Other Operating System: Modem speed (none/2400/9600/14.4/28.8): Your Comments How did you find out about us?: Word of Mouth: WWW: Article: Article in TELECOM Digest November 18, 1996 Other Method: Referrals To let a friend or relative receive further information about how they can get FreeMark Mail, please provide the following information. Please note that the service is currently only available to US residents. Referral 1 Referral 1 First Name: Referral 1 MI: Referral 1 Last Name: Referral 1 Address1: Referral 1 Address2: Referral 1 City: Referral 1 State: Referral 1 Zip: Referral 1 Phone #: Referral 1 E-mail address: Referral 2 Referral 2 First Name: Referral 2 MI: Referral 2 Last Name: Referral 2 Address1: Referral 2 Address2: Referral 2 City: Referral 2 State: Referral 2 Zip: Referral 2 Phone #: Referral 2 E-mail address: ---form ends here--- --------- End forwarded message ---------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now as I have said in the past, I am a little suspicious of all these things, **but** this does not seem like a half-bad program for people who send a large volume of email they otherwise have to pay for and who do not mind reading advertising in the process. This certainly would be for advertisers a far more legitimate way of using the net than all the junk email we see now. If anyone wants to try it out and make a report, I certainly know the readers will want to see it. And if you want to try advertising with them (or finding out more details about the advertising program) then call them at 617-492-6600 and please report on that also. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #623 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 19 14:25:02 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA11605; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:25:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:25:02 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611191925.OAA11605@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #624 TELECOM Digest Tue, 19 Nov 96 14:25:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 624 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Payphone Deregulation (Jack Decker) Re: Telco Loophole Exempts ISP's From Fees? (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! (David Clayton) Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! (Nils Andersson) Re: Ameritech Questions (Eric Fischer) Re: Toll Free Directory of Spammer's Numbers (Fred Farzanegan) Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades (Bill Boga) Communications Technology Delegation to Israel - Jan 1997 (Greg Kirsch) Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization (Isaac Wingfield) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: jack@novagate.com (Jack Decker) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 15:54:20 GMT Organization: GTE Intelligent Network Services, GTE INS On Sun, 17 Nov 1996 19:41:42 +0000, John Stahl wrote: > Here is Mr. Pluckett's outline of the latest FCC plans to deregulate > the payphone market: > "Payphones are currently provided by traditional local exchange > carriers (LEC's) and private payphone service providers (PSP's). > First, the new rules establish a compensation structure to compensate > payphone providers when callers, using a carrier other than the one to > which the phone is presubscribed to, "dial around" to other > carriers. Carriers will be required to track and compensate payphone > owners on a per call basis. Initially, the compensation rate will be > set at $0.35/call, however, until systems can be developed to track > such calls, each PSP will be compensated for the first year at a flat > amount of $45.85 per phone. This compensation will be proportionally > divided among all interexchange carriers who have toll revenues in > excess of $100 million per year." [ ... rest of stupid plan details deleted ... ] Well, once again we have a federal agency illegally trampling the Tenth Amendment and deciding that the free market is incapable of operation without their "help". The government that can't deliver the mail on time is now going to presume to decide the value of a pay phone call, and to tell the states how they must regulate pay phone calls. The only part of this entire scheme that I can really support is the requirement that telephone companies provide the same functionality to privately owned pay phones as they do to their own phones -- that should have happened YEARS ago. But even then, the requirement is worded ambiguously. What it should have said is that telephone companies WILL deliver call supervision information to private pay phone operators (or, for that matter, anyone else who has a use for it) either free of charge or at a tariffed rate, but if they charge others for this supervision, they must also impute this charge to their own pay phones. As it is, a phone company could decide to "dumb down" their own pay phone lines (not use answer supervision from the central office at all), and use the equivalent of COCOT's rather than conventional pay phones (as I recall, a TELECOM Digest reader wrote that one Bell company was doing exactly this a few days ago). In the absence of supervision provided by the central office, you can just bet that more people will lose money in coin phones, and if the phone companies migrate to putting the "smarts" in the individual phones rather than the central office, you can also bet that people will have more problems completing certain types of calls (calls to new area codes, non U.S. locations, and in some cases even calls that require dialing extra digits such as pager calls). The other thing that bothers me about this scheme is that the FCC actually seems to have decided that a pay phone call should cost 35 cents. Now, if they want to decide that this is the proper rate for the Washington, D.C. area, that's well and good, but I do not see where they have any constitutional authority to regulate this outside of the nation's capitol (of course, one might asked how long it has been since the federal government really observed the spirit of the Constitution, let alone the letter of it). This is clearly an issue that should remain in the hands of state regulators. There are MANY local phone companies that charge less than 35 cents for a local coin call -- the Allendale Telephone Company in Allendale, Michigan (a Grand Rapids suburb) still charges only ten cents for a coin call! Will Allendale be required to raise their rates? Here's another one: In Michigan we have had (for about three decades now) a flat rate of 20 cents untimed for any coin-paid call to a location under 20 miles away, even if that call would otherwise be a toll call. Will that rate go away because the federal rules deny the right of the states to regulate telephone rates within their own boundaries? Perhaps the biggest problem I see with this scheme is that it has the potential to drive up rates for all 800/888 service users, or else bring about a form of discrimination against pay phone calls. Consider that if a long distance carrier gets nicked for 35 cents for every pay phone call, sooner or later one of three things will happen: 1) They will raise the price of all 800/888 calls to cover the added costs. Clearly their customers would not like this option, and would probably migrate to carriers that don't do this, so I don't see this as a very viable option. 2) They will start offering a class of 800/888 service that refuses to accept calls from pay phones. Of course, this is available today, but there is no real economic incentive (in most situations) to block calls from pay phones. But I can forsee a day when you may pay a much higher per-minute rate for your 800/888 service if you choose to accept calls from pay phones. 3) They will actually charge the full 35 cents of each call from a pay phone back to the called customer on a per-call basis. I see this having the same effect as (2) - in an effort to control costs, many companies will restrict the availability of certain numbers from pay phones. This will mainly disadvantage those that don't have phone service in their homes, and those who are away from home. I can't help wondering if the person who is having car trouble some dark and lonely night, and who doesn't have change for the pay phone, will still be able to call for help. I will just bet that this will be the cause of even more calls to 911, since that will be the only thing that people may be able to reach in such a circumstance. It would be nice to think that the auto clubs will still keep up their 800 numbers, but if the cost of doing that goes right through the ceiling, they may be forced to discontinue 800 access from pay phones. > Where are the savings that the 'Act' is supposed to give us? > Everything the FCC seems to be doing as result of it are going to cost > all of us more money to use the phone system! Well, I would not say that EVERYTHING they do is costing us more money -- at least so far they have not given in to the pressures to try and impose access charges on Internet Service Providers. But I do feel that the scheme we are discussing here was particularly ill-advised, and while I'm not a constitutional attorney, to me it seems that it violates the doctrine of states' rights (the Tenth Amendment) -- but then, so does a lot of other current federal legislation. I wonder if the F.C.C. is trying to kill pay phones entirely? Because soon they will be of little value to many people, particularly if cellular (and PCS) rates continue to decrease. Jack ------------------------------ From: fgoldstein@bbn.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Telco Loophole Exempts ISP's From Fees? Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:08:27 EST Organization: BBN Corp. In article Derek Balling writes: > I work for an Internet Service Provider in the midwest and received a > very interesting piece of junk mail from a company that purports to > know of a loophole in Telecom law which presumably exempts ISP's from > paying (my guess here is) the Interstate Subscriber Line Charge. > Having previously worked for a LEC I was not aware of this loophole, > and cannot find any evidence of it by digging about on the FCC > site. For good reason. (spammer quote:) > In 1983, the U.S. government exempted companies who provide access to > the national network of computers from certain fees imposed by the > RBOCs. "Unfortunately, the telephone companies' business offices are > often unaware of the exemption, and the smaller ISP, as a consequence, > gets charged. The larger ISPs and their phalanx of lawyers know about > the exemptions; the smaller ones often do not," Mr. Bayerle said. > .... If you want IDEA to process your refund for you > (their fee is 15%), then follow the procedure at the IDEA website: Well, the 15% is the motive. Of course 15% of zero is zero. What IDEA might do is your usual billing audit, and take 15% of any overcharges they find, but there's no "exemption" in play. What the FCC did in the '80s was divide the world into two camps, those who are subscribers of the telephone network and those who are long-distance carriers. Enhanced Service Providers, which include ISPs, were a contentious issue. In the notorious 1987-88 "modem tax" dispute, the FCC adopted a face-saving compromise. They declared that while they believe that ESPs are really more like carriers than subscribers, they'd bow to the will of Congress and "exempt" them from the huge fees levied against interstate carriers. (In separate proceedings, Bell Atlantic and PacBell are currently trying to get the "exemption" lifted, reclassifying ISPs as IXCs.) The "exemption" was to the Carrier Common Line Charges (CCLC), not to Subscriber Line Charges (SLCs) which are charged to the non-carrier *subscribers*. You pay one or the other. This is the way the FCC administers the jurisdictional separations required under the 1927 Supreme Court ruling Smith v. Illinois Bell. If all the ISPs and other ESPs tried to get back the $6/line SLCs et al, the telcos and FCC would simply be able to cite the Smith decision. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein@bbn.com BBN Corp., Cambridge MA USA +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 07:59:49 GMT Organization: Customer of Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) contributed the following: >> Monty Solomon contributed the following: >>> After a few of these unexplained crashes, one of our MIS group noticed >>> that every time he went in to the server room to reboot the dead >>> servers, one of the AT&T engineers was using his mobile phone. So, >>> they were asked to turn their phones off while working in the server >>> room, and the problem has not reoccurred. lots cut ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if anyone has looked at that > possibility where TWA Flight 800 was concerned, or in the situation where > the two airplanes which collided over India last week? GSM is common > enough in many parts of the world after all; isn't it possible that a > GSM phone might have been accidentally left turned on with resulting > problems in the navigation of the aircraft? PAT] I have accidently left a GSM phone on during a flight in Australia and lived to tell the tale (on a B-767 I think). AFAIK the GSM spec allows the phone to transmit an ID to a base station when polled, this does not occur that often and the total amount of power is pretty low, (otherwise the standby times wouldn't be very good). When they know they are out of range, some GSM phones "go to sleep" and only try to connect to a base station after a certain time. I don't know how much signal from a base station would actually get to a phone in flight and trigger a response, I mean how much power is radiated upwards?, you would think that the antenna designers would be putting all of the power out in a horizontal radiation pattern for maximum effect. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! Date: 18 Nov 1996 20:03:37 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article was written: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if anyone has looked at that > possibility where TWA Flight 800 was concerned, or in the situation where > the two airplanes which collided over India last week? GSM is common > enough in many parts of the world after all; isn't it possible that a > GSM phone might have been accidentally left turned on with resulting > problems in the navigation of the aircraft? PAT] I doubt it as to TWA 800. That one started as an explosion in the mid-body somewhere, however caused. For candidates for crash caused by navigational error, look for crashes that start (and, obviously, end) with the aircraft hitting something (terrestrial or another plane). Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: eric@fudge.uchicago.edu (Eric Fischer) Subject: Re: Ameritech Questions Organization: University of Chicago -- Academic Computing Services Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 05:35:00 GMT In article , wrote: > In article , srkleine@midway.uchicago. > edu (steven r kleinedler) writes: >> No -- we don't need to see the whole 312 area -- we know that the city >> line is the boundary on the outer edge. I just want to see a map >> of the jagged line that runs roughly along North, Western, and 35th >> (Lake Michigan's the fourth boundary). The boundary is really erratic >> in places, and I thought if *anyone* had a map of it, it'd be >> Ameritech. > I think that much more important than a map is a list of prefixes, > including those that change and those that don't. Preferably, the list > should be available as machine-readable so that people with large > databases can upgrade smoothly. I received a postcard in the mail from Ameritech a few days ago with a list of the exchanges being moved to 773. It's rather long, or I'd type it in here. Anyway, I assume other Ameritech customers will also be getting these in the near future (if Chicago's postal service can be trusted). Eric ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:05:38 +0000 From: fred farzanegan Subject: Re: Toll Free Directory of Spammer's Numbers Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd. (Re: internet spammer directory) While I _have_ called CyberPromotions several times on their 800 number for each instance of email I received from them AFTER I asked them to desist, I'm not so sure about this directory. The groups that were listed in the post: Newsgroups: alt.flame, talk.bizarre, alt.sex, alt.hackers are not exactly high-quality ones. I find it suspicious that the spammer directory does NOT list the offender's names, only their numbers. Just like the poor guy who was listed as a worldwide kiddy-porner because of a flamewar on some local newsgroup, it wouldn't be hard to include some businesses that have p*ssed you off in the list. I saw a posting from a bunch of kooks who were boycotting _my_ company because one of our admins was part of an internet group that was cracking down on spammers. So, I would suggest not using information from this source unless the directory had a listing of exactly who the alleged offenders were. A further suspicion is that all the numbers have extensions associated with them -- isn't the *owner* of the number responsible for the 800 number charges, not the specific extension? Of course, the numbers may actually be valid, but I'll pass on this one. I don't want to end up at my own switchboard! fred farzanegan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe I should have been a little more clear about that. A large message went out spam-style over the weekend which had all those numbers in one message. A common thinng now is for a spamming organization (I think it may have been Cyber- Times in fact) to send out a single message with a lot of small blurbs in it for various advertisers. That is what happened in this case. I got the message here in my own mail, and got a few copies from readers commenting on it. Then I got the message from the guy who wrote in those other newsgroups summarizing it. I ran his message, and tossed in a couple more that he had not included in my next message. So they are spammer numbers. I just eliminated most of the details about what they are selling. Regarding that one number which showed up over and over, with a different extension each time, let me explain how that works. If I am not mistaken, I believe the number is located in southern Illinois, down near St. Louis, MO. The company -- which caters to spammers -- has a single voicemail machine with lots of 'boxes'. Each spammer gets a two or three minute outgoing message which is accessed when you enter their 'extension number'. Punch in the four digits announced, and hear the advertisement. You can sit there all day punching in one extension after another and listen to dozens of spam messages. I think there is some method by which the company keeps track of which 'extensions' were called and makes a charge-back to each advertiser for their pro-rated share of the 800 number expense. You will see that same 800 number show up quite frequently in spam on the net (or junk e-mail), always with a different 'extension' to be punched in for whichever spam it is that you received. So don't worry about calling that 800 number as often as needed to learn about all the exciting offers and opportunities to Make Money Fast. Believe me, don't worry about it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: phonebill@bellsouth.net (Bill Boga) Subject: Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades Date: Mon, 18 Nov 96 21:55:29 GMT Organization: BellSouth.Net Well, one thing you'll get now is a quiter hookflash for call waiting. True that wouldn't quite justify upgrading the CO. As I understand it, in order for BellSouth to upgrade any of their CO's, they must upgrade the oldest CO's first. While residential POTS subscribers may not need all the "bells and whistles" that a digital switch will provide, I'm sure there are businesses that do. BellSouth, I'm sure, is positioning themselves to provided more advanced features to residential customers too, and they've decided on the digital switch platform. There is probably a cost justifcation related to maintenance costs, too. Since the 1A has many moving parts, relays and what not, upkeep can be quite expensive, compared to the digitally switched #5. This of course is only a guess. Bill Boga phonebill@bellsouth.net ------------------------------ From: Greg Kirsch Subject: Communications Technology Delegation to Israel - Jan 1997 Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 11:57:51 -0800 Organization: Needle & Rosenberg, P.C. Did you know that the Pentium chip and the world's first voice over the Internet software were both developed in Israel? Have you heard about the: COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY DELEGATION TO ISRAEL January 3-12, 1997 The American-Israel Chamber of Commerce-Southeast Region, together with the following co-sponsors: BellSouth Northern Telecom (Nortel) Melita International Needle & Rosenberg, P.C. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu International Government of Israel Economic Mission Georgia Center for Advanced Telecommunication Technology (GCATT) Southeastern Software Association invite you to consider this exceptional opportunity for companies in the communications industries (telecom, Internet, software, etc.) -- nine days of unique business and touring opportunities including: - Exclusive engagements with high-level Israeli government leaders - Direct interaction with Israeli telecom company CEOs, CTOs, etc. - Preview of emerging technologies - Survey of the new Middle East and attractive R&D funding opportunities - Customized itineraries to suit your business needs - TELECOM ISRAEL '97 -- the International Exhibition for Communications Electronics and Information Technologies - Spouse agenda and extensive touring options - Rewarding spiritual and historical experiences WHY ISRAEL? Israel boasts of incredible ingenuity and technological capabilities. With such established companies as Tadiran and Telrad, plus new ones like BellSouth's successful Cellcom, Israel is a KEY player in the worldwide telecommunications and communication technology arena. In fact, Israel is the 5th largest export market for U.S. telecommunications products, acting more like a country of 100 million consumers than its actual 6 million. The opportunies for your company are endless. Companies are signing up NOW to participate in this unique event, which is being sponsored by Southeastern U.S. organizations, but which is open to companies and individuals nationwide. If you have any questions, or would like additional information, please feel free to contact the undersigned at mailto:kirsch@needlepatent.com Also, feel free to visit our delegation web site at: http://www.mindspring.com/~udi/telecomm.html Greg Kirsch Needle & Rosenberg, P.C. (intellectual property law firm) Atlanta, Georgia (404) 688-0770 mailto:kirsch@needlepatent.com http://www.needlepatent.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 08:42:55 -0800 From: isw@hdvs.com (Isaac Wingfield) Subject: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization I'm involved with the IEEE committee which is setting standards for cable modems (data over cable-TV networks). One type of data to be carried over these networks is digital telephony. I understand that there is a need for a precise (loop timed) 8 KHz reference in the domestic unit. The trick is to decide how to deliver this reference, and how many are needed. There's no reason to assume that a given cable TV provider will deal with a single telco; there might be several in the area. Under normal (and also under abnormal) conditions, just how close are the clocks of different telcos locked together? If there is asychrony, is it a problem at the DS-0 level? That is, if a domestic unit is taking voice samples using telco #1's clock, can the samples be used to build DS-1 frames at telco B, which has a (slightly) different clock? I really need to get some definitive answers to these and related questions. If someone with the appropriate knowledge is willing to discuss it, please let me know how to get in touch. Thanks, Isaac Wingfield Staff System Engineer isw@hdvs.com Hyundai Digital Video Systems Vox: 408-232-8530 3103 N. First Street Fax: 408-232-8145 San Jose, CA 95134 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #624 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 19 21:51:02 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id VAA24362; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 21:51:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 21:51:02 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611200251.VAA24362@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #625 TELECOM Digest Tue, 19 Nov 96 21:50:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 625 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "The Complete Internet Business Toolkit" (Rob Slade) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Dave Levenson) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Rahul Ddhesi) Re: Split San Jose? (Carl Moore) Re: Split San Jose? (Ross Oliver) Re: Calculating Usage From a Telco "Busy Study" (Alan Boritz) Has Anyone Read Any of These? (Larry J. Plato) SPW Simulation Question (Hiao-Chiu Chu) Employment Opportunity: CTI/IVR Telephony Tech (Roland Vasco) Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization (Bill Sohl) Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization (Gerry Moersdorf) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (hwertz@avalon.net) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Rick Ellis) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Dave Platt) Latest on Caller ID in New Zealand (Ken Moselen) Re: Last Laugh! 666 Exchange and Disgruntled Subcribers (Clayton Cramer) Re: Last Laugh! 666 Exchange and Disgruntled Subcribers (Michael Grover) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 19 Nov 1996 17:15:26 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Complete Internet Business Toolkit" BKCMINBT.RVW 960724 "The Complete Internet Business Toolkit", Schwartau/Goggans, 1996, 0-442-02222-0 %A Winn Schwartau winn@infowar.com %A Chris Goggans chris@fc.net %C 115 Fifth Ave., New York, NY 10003 %D 1996 %G 0-442-02222-0 %I Van Nostrand Reinhold (VNR) %O +1-800-842-3636 +1-212-254-3232 fax: +1-212-254-9499 aburt-murray@vnr.com %P 262 %T "The Complete Internet Business Toolkit" All too many "business on the Internet" books emphasize business plans and concepts, and completely miss the fact that the net is a radically different place in which to conduct commerce. Schwartau and Goggans travel to the other end of the spectrum and provide a good (though quick) introduction to Internet tools and applications. This results, however, in a book which is perhaps too light on the business side. Companion CD-ROMs are often random collections of shareware. In this case the authors have put together a useful (and generally up to date) collection. Both the information files and the programs (with the possible exception of the ubiquitous SCAN) are well regarded standards in their respective fields. True, all are available online, but their availability here will get you up to speed faster and with less hassle. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKCMINBT.RVW 960724. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Why did the chicken cross the Moebius Strip? To get to the other.. um.. er.. Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 22:43:53 GMT John Stahl (aljon@worldnet.att.net) writes: > These prescribed changes will surly add to the 'out-of-pocket' costs > for everyone using payphones (and most everyone does). You know that > the payphone providers and/or the LECs are going to increase their > basic rates in order to cover these additional costs! If one class of telephone user has been paying a subsidy to another, and the subsidy ends, the result is that the former recipient of the subsidy will pay more, and the former payer of the subsidy will pay less. LEC payphones have been subsidized by other LEC subscribers. The LEC's may choose to increase the cost of calls from their payphones, and reduce the cost of some other services which have been paying the subsidy. On the other hand, the IXC's who sell 800 service, and the debit-card issuers, have been heavy users of payphones and have not had to pay anything for this use. The free ride ends here. This means that payphone owners (COCOT and LEC payphone owners) will now be paid for this traffic which they used to handle for free. This revenue may replace the subsidy that the LEC payphones will be losing, and the result may be that 800 service will cost more, but that payphone service will cost the public the same. Many COCOT operators price sent-paid calls below the LEC payphone prices today. With de-regulated coin rates, the LEC's may try to match the COCOT prices, with the result that consumers who place sent-paid calls from payphones will pay less. > Where are the savings that the 'Act' is supposed to give us? The Act, in and of itself, does not `give us' savings. It gives us competition ... and that is supposed to give us savings. Where subsidies existed in a non-competitive market, some costs will likely go up while others go down as the subsidies end. > Everything the FCC seems to be doing as result of it are going to cost > all of us more money to use the phone system! Those who were at the receiving end of the subsidies that were built into the regulated system will probably pay more; those who paid may pay less. In general, competition drives prices closer to costs. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: dhesi@ether.rahul.net (Rahul Dhesi) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: 19 Nov 1996 19:46:25 GMT Organization: a2i network In John Stahl writes: > Here is Mr. Pluckett's outline of the latest FCC plans to deregulate > the payphone market: > "PAYPHONE DEREGULATION" > First, the new rules establish a compensation structure to compensate > payphone providers when callers, using a carrier other than the one to > which the phone is presubscribed to, "dial around" to other > carriers. Carriers will be required to track and compensate payphone > owners on a per call basis. Initially, the compensation rate will be > set at $0.35/call, however, until systems can be developed to track > such calls, each PSP will be compensated for the first year at a flat > amount of $45.85 per phone. I am so glad the FCC does not regulate sales of gloves. Let's see ... 1. Stores are not permitted to mark up the price of gloves. 2. Each store is required to sell gloves made by every manufacturer. 3. Stores are now complaining. 4. So now the FCC makes a ruling that when a store sells gloves, the glove manufacturer must pay the store a flat $4.50 commission per pair of gloves. 5. Gloves that used to cost $0.99 now suddenly cost at least $4.50. Rahul Dhesi "please ignore Dhesi" -- Mark Crispin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Nov 96 15:41:12 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Split San Jose? This is why overlays have been proposed in some places, whether they get shot down or not. My new phone book for Northeastern Maryland has gone ahead with notes on overlay there, and all listings are now supposed to have the area code. Previously, Middletown (Del.) listings were supposed to have the 302 area code showing (some of these did slip through the cracks), due to the presence in the SAME white pages of 410-378 Port Deposit. ------------------------------ From: reo@crl.com (Ross Oliver) Subject: Re: Split San Jose? Date: 19 Nov 1996 13:48:38 -0800 Organization: The Air Affair: http://www.airaffair.com/ Tad Cook (tad@ssc.com) wrote: >> Earlier this month the council adopted a resolution urging the PUC to >> keep the part of Santa Clara County already in the 408 area code >> intact. The county board took similar action last month. >> City government, along with businesses and offices throughout San >> Jose, would have difficulty conducting business with two area codes, >> critics say. McGurk points to the parks department and other municipal >> offices on the former Almaden Winery property on Blossom Hill Road. How appropriate to use a winery in this example of government whining. The Santa Clara county government doesn't seem to have any trouble with 10-digit phone numbers. A quick glance at the government pages of the phone book shows a dozen or so county facilities in the 415 area code. I can't wait to hear what San Jose has to say about the Year 2000 problem. "City governmnet would have difficulty conducting business with four-digit years in the date." Ross Oliver, proud resident of the capital of Silly-con Valley: Sunnyvale ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Calculating Usage From a Telco "Busy Study" From: drharry!aboritz@uunet.uu.net (Alan Boritz) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 07:55:54 EST Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - +1 201 934 0861 In comp.dcom.telecom, langloid@magi.com writes: > Maybe someone out there can help. > I have a "Central Office Subscriber Line Usage Study" from a mid-west > Canadian telco (also known as a "busy study") for several lines (both > urban and rural). Even though there is a name and number for a contact > person, I am having no luck at all in arriving at answers to some of > my questions. So hopefully one of you will be able to assist me here. Take a course in network design and learn to read and interpret traffic tables. As you may have guessed, these are the kind of issues for which you hire a telecom professional. ------------------------------ From: ljp@umich.edu (Larry J. Plato) Subject: Has Anyone Read Any of These? Date: 19 Nov 1996 18:56:28 GMT Organization: ANS Greetings, I am fairly savvy about T1 but I am looking for some good books to use in training new folks. Has anyone read any of the below books? I don't read this newsgroup much so private email to ljp@ans.net would be appreciated, Thanks in advance, Larry Plato pulled from a list at http://www.ctexpo.com/tc/tc_bks.html THE GUIDE TO T-1 NETWORKING How to Buy, Install & Use T-1, From DeskTop to DS-3 by William Flanagan 222 pages, 1990 $29.95 Code P09002 This perennial best seller is a thorough guide to buying, installing and using T-1 circuits and the often complex equipment that you need to hook up T-1 lines. There are four reasons to buy T-1: Major dollar savings on long distance calls and international calls voice, data and video calls. Substantially better communications quality. T-1 is all digital. Flexibility to reconfigure connections - voice one minute, data the next, video the next. Improve network reliability. Achieving these four benefits can be painful (T-1 expertise is short among telephone companies) and expensive. Thats where this book comes in. It will save you and your company a fortune in mistakes you could have avoided. This book covers the equipment you'll need at your office, how to install your T-1 lines and how to manage your T-1 network. You'll learn enough jargon to be dangerous with your installing phone company. This book is the accepted training manual on T-1 throughout the industry. Every vendor - seller, installer, maintainer - is trained on T-1 with this book. Buying Flanagan's best-selling book is a handy, cheap way of slicing through the nonsense vendors occasionally feed you. UNDERSTANDING TELEPHONE ELECTRONICS by Stephen Bigelow 368 pages, 1993 $24.95 Code P32002 1. The Telephone System 2. The Conventional Telephone Set 3. Electronic Speech Circuits 4. Electronic Dialing & Ringing Circuits 5. A Microcomputer in the Telephone 6. Digital Transmission Techniques 7. Electronics in the Central Office 8. Network Transmission 9. Modems. TELEPHONY FOR COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS by Jane Laino 279 pages, 1994 $34.95 Code P07008 This book teaches computer professionals everything they need to know about a very complex industry called telecommunications. Though computers and telecom appear to use the same technology, they are very different in every aspect -- from the way services are priced and bought to the nature of telecom vendors, especially the telephone company. This book is based on the author's many years in telecom consulting, replete with war stories, screw-ups and lessons learned. Excellent education for computer professionals. ------------------------------ From: hchu@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (hsiao-chiu chu) Subject: SPW Simulation Question Date: 20 Nov 1996 01:10:12 GMT Organization: Indiana University Dear Sirs: I used to practice design on DSP or digital communication systems on a simulation package named SPW. Now I try to buy a copy for the company I work, and couldn't find any information about it. Does anyone knows if the company that create SPW still exists? Or has it been merged with some other company and using a different name? Another question is I know COSSAP also making simulation for DSP, any comparison between these two products? Which is better? Thanks for any information that you can spare:)!! Hsiao-CHiu Chu ------------------------------ From: datal@agetech.net (Roland Vasco) Subject: Employment Opportunity: CTI/IVR Telephony Tech Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:22:09 GMT Growing Miami, Fl company needs telephony tech for local Miami operation. This position is available immediately. Please fax your resume to: Roland Vasco 1(305) 577-9774 ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 20:47:46 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises isw@hdvs.com (Isaac Wingfield) wrote: > I'm involved with the IEEE committee which is setting standards for > cable modems (data over cable-TV networks). One type of data to be > carried over these networks is digital telephony. I understand that > there is a need for a precise (loop timed) 8 KHz reference in the > domestic unit. The trick is to decide how to deliver this reference, > and how many are needed. > There's no reason to assume that a given cable TV provider will deal > with a single telco; there might be several in the area. Under normal > (and also under abnormal) conditions, just how close are the clocks of > different telcos locked together? If there is asychrony, is it a > problem at the DS-0 level? That is, if a domestic unit is taking voice > samples using telco #1's clock, can the samples be used to build DS-1 > frames at telco B, which has a (slightly) different clock? Synchronization within the telecommunications networks is a very exacting set of requirements. Try contacting Bellcore (Hq is Morristown, NJ 201 area code) to see if there is someone who may be there that has continuing network synchronization responsibilities. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: Gerry Moersdorf Subject: Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:56:16 -0500 Organization: Applied Innovation Inc. Reply-To: gerry@aiinet.com Isaac Wingfield wrote: > I'm involved with the IEEE committee which is setting standards for > cable modems (data over cable-TV networks). One type of data to be > carried over these networks is digital telephony. I understand that > there is a need for a precise (loop timed) 8 KHz reference in the > domestic unit. The trick is to decide how to deliver this reference, > and how many are needed. Synchronization is a big issue for telcos and bypass, of local exchange service provider, catv players included. The trick is to keep the entire transmission system in syncronization to prevent what is called "bit slippage". Bit slippage can cause trouble for datacommunications circuits, and to a lesser degree voice circuits. Slippage between two carrier systems could cause a slower modem transmission rate, 14.4 instead of 28kb for instance. On dedicated FD circuits could cause high retransmission rates end to end. So,, we have a system. One described in unbelievable detail by Bellcore documents. The system currently being deployed uses GPS recievers which lock to the rock solid freq reference provided by NBS atomic clock. These systems usually have backup clock generators that use local temp compensated oscillators or local atomic clocks. there is a company that provides a range of these systems "telcom soutions" and another "austron". you can get an education from them. Gerry Moersdorf, President/CEO Applied Innovation INC 5800 Innovation Dr, Dublin OH 800-247-9482 ------------------------------ From: hwertz@avalon.net Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 19 Nov 1996 05:14:15 GMT Organization: Avalon Networks Inc. Tim Russell (russell@probe.net) wrote: > tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) writes: >> Higher Fees at Peak Hours Might Ease Logjams, According to U. Texas Study >> By Lori Hawkins, Austin American-Statesman, Texas >> Nov. 7--People pay more to make long-distance phone calls during peak >> times. Soon, Internet surfers may do the same. > IMHO, this is a bad idea. Just because right now, the peak time > is a certain time of the day, doesn't mean it would stay that way once > a daytime-based pricing scheme is put into place. What are we going > to do, have weekly updates mailed out to everyone on the net with the > Peak Time Of The Week? I agree. Metered access period would suck. > Better is to wait for the RSVP standards to be implemented and get > a proper interface to it to the users' desktops. Users would normally > use a default "priority", or whatever it's called, and not get charged > anything extra. If they're unsatisfied with response times, give them > a way to kick up their priority and pay extra for it. A good proxy cache network could take care of some problems too. Great Britain has a well-established one that apparently has cut international WWW bandwidth useage by 75% I think? At least 50%. On the closest scale there would be a proxy locally at the ISP, which would access the (network-wise) nearest ones, which probably would either access a few national ones or sites directly. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that from my location >> here, things have become horrible. Having a 28.8 modem on the line means >> absolutely nothing. I might as well go back to having a 300 baud modem. > Maybe from where you sit, Pat, but not here. Sitting on the MCI > backbone, with access to a full T1, I regularly get transfer rates of > 45K/second or more to sites all over the net, and I'm sure that's > often more limited by the speed of my PC than by net throughput. I > would, however, appreciate a way to slow things down when I'm not > worried about speed, which is quite often. RSVP would provide that, > since it works both ways, allowing me to lower my "priority". Ditto. When I'm downloading some game or source or something that's big enough I'll leave it overnight I really don't care if I'm getting 3K/s or 1K/s ... (28.8 link ... so I really don't get above 3K/s ...) > One large problem that I often see lies in the inability from the > user's point of view to tell whether it's the net on the whole that's > slow (i.e. the backbone), the far provider's connection that's swamped, > or the far host that's slow. Quite often I receive calls from users Traceroute ... it tells reasonably well. When the traceroute time goes from (on the wrong end of a 28.8) 110ms to 400ms, that's the slow link. When it goes from 110 or 120ms to 1000ms, that's probably some guy's SLIP link 8-). ------------------------------ From: ellis@ftel.net (Rick Ellis) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 20 Nov 1996 03:37:02 GMT Organization: Franklin interNet, Westlake Village, CA [http://www.ftel.net] In article , Louis Raphael wrote: >> Mail delivery takes absolutely *forever*; > I've had that happen. I quite often get four-hour notices when mailing > certain people nowadays. *That* I find terrible. E-mail is one of the most > useful features of the 'net, and one that requires very little in the way > of resources -- yet often unusable because of the surfers. It would be good > if there were some mechanism for reserving a small percentage of bandwidth > for e-mail -- and that's all it would take (remember how much e-mail BITnet > could handle on 14.4K lines?). Most of the four hour notices don't seem to have much to do with congestion. I've found them either to be backbone problems (e.g. broken routers or links) or sites with DNS problems. Even heavily loaded mail servers don't seem to take four hours to accept mail. ------------------------------ From: dplatt@tvsoft.com (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 18 Nov 1996 21:41:58 GMT Organization: Navio Communications, Inc. >> I've had that happen. I quite often get four-hour notices when mailing >> certain people nowadays. *That* I find terrible. > I'm almost certain that the four hour notice is because the other > end's mailer is not ready to receive mail. That's usually the situation in the cases I've seen. A couple of people on a mailing-list I administer seem to be set up to receive SMTP mail directly to their PCs, and these systems are connected to the net for only a few hours a day. They don't have backup MX servers, apparently. It became annoying enough that I changed my sendmail configuration to send me the first "undeliverable, will keep trying" message after one day rather than 4 hours. This has cut the warning messages to near-zero, and the delay in the warnings doesn't trouble me at all. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 11:14:59 +1300 From: Ken Moselen Subject: Latest on Caller ID in New Zealand Pat, Just a quick update on CNID here in New Zealand. As of Friday (November 15th) Bellsouth (the GSM Celluar Operator here) is delivering CNID within it's own network. Bellsouth at present is not delivering the numbers from the other cellular carrier, nor landline phones; but I suspect this is because the other carriers currently do not support CNID, and are not giving the data to Bellsouth for delivery. The number that shows up on the phone's display is the full international number, e.g. 006421123456; which translates as 00 (Our international access code), 64 New Zealand's country code) 21 (Bellsouth's Cellular areacode) and 123456 (the subscriber's phone number). Ken Moselen CAD Administrator, City Design, Christchurch City Council, PO Box 237, Christchurch, New Zealand. Ken.Moselen@ccc.govt.nz Tel: +64.3.3711708 Fax: +64.3.3711783 Gsm: +64.21.337963 ------------------------------ From: Clayton E. Cramer Subject: Re: Last Laugh! 666 Exchange and Disgruntled Subcribers Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 09:15:15 -0800 Organization: Diamond Lane Communications Reply-To: cramer@dlcc.com Mike Fox wrote: > When I was travelling in San Francisco this spring, I was flipping > through the phone book in the hotel room and saw that every telephone > number for a Jesuit college in SF (I don't remember its exact name) is > in exchange 666! That exchange probably belongs to their PBX, because > I didn't see any other 666 numbers in a quick scan. > I guess if they can put up with it, others can too :) (This might be useful if you have to persuade someone to accept this exchange.) They can put up with it because the 666 specified in Revelation 13:18 will not be a number literally associated with the beast. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.[Rev. 13:18, New American Standard Version] A form of numerology common among first century AD Jews was called "geametria," a corruption of the Greek word "geometria." Each letter in a person's name was assigned a value corresponding to the letter's alphabetic sequence. By adding up the numbers of a person's name, it was possible to "calculate the number" of someone. Therefore, the 666 was not a number readily visible in a phone number, or social security number, or any other visible form, by something that could be calculated. (I understand that Emperor Nero's name fits the 666 well, as do a number of other evil people throughout history, depending on the alphabet used.) Clayton E. Cramer Technical Marketing Manager, Diamond Lane Communications email: cramer@dlcc.com web page: http://www.cs.sonoma.edu/~cramerc Opinions are strictly my own; DLCC doesn't pay me for non-technical opinions. ------------------------------ From: mgrover@ix.netcom.com (Michael Grover) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! 666 Exchange and Disgruntled Subcribers Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 19:30:40 GMT Organization: Netcom Mike Fox wrote: > When I was travelling in San Francisco this spring, I was flipping > through the phone book in the hotel room and saw that every telephone > number for a Jesuit college in SF (I don't remember its exact name) is > in exchange 666! That exchange probably belongs to their PBX, because > I didn't see any other 666 numbers in a quick scan. > I guess if they can put up with it, others can too :) There was an article in the {San Francisco Chronicle} about this not too long ago ... The University of San Francisco has had blocks of numbers with the 666 prefix for quite sometime. They will soon be migrating to another prefix because of capacity; they need additional numbers which are not available on 666. The article indicated they did not have the entire 666 prefix. The article seemed to make a point of explaining that the move was a capacity issue and that the university wasn't worried about 666 itself. Michael ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #625 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 20 13:47:55 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA29322; Wed, 20 Nov 1996 13:47:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 13:47:55 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611201847.NAA29322@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #626 TELECOM Digest Wed, 20 Nov 96 13:47:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 626 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Southwestern Bell ISDN (Tad Cook) Mac Beta Testers Needed - BellSouth.net (Monty Solomon) Section 251 Failure to Negotiate (Marty Tennant) Slimy Pac-Bell Caller ID Blocking Ad (Linc Madison) *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory! (John Cropper) Re: Telco Loophole Exempts ISP's From Fees? (David Loomis) Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! (Bob Goudreau) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Ken Weaverling) Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line (George Hills) Re: Book Review: "The Complete Internet Business Toolkit" (Ian Angus) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Southwestern Bell ISDN Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 22:53:01 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Southwestern Bell Begins High-Speed DigiLine By Ray Tuttle, Tulsa World, Okla. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Nov. 19--Southwestern Bell introduced a digital technology Monday that enables residential and business customers to send or receive large amounts of data simultaneously over existing phone lines. Southwestern Bell's high-speed service, called DigiLine, allows more information to travel at higher speeds over regular copper telephone lines, a communications necessity as more Oklahomans race down the information superhighway, said Rich Dietz, regional president of Southwestern Bell Oklahoma. Southwestern Bell spent $16 million make DigiLine more widely available. The system, known as Integrated Services Digital Network, or ISDN, was introduced six years ago, but was used only by large corporations. Dietz said Southwestern Bell officials expect to reach up to 1 percent of the market by end of 1997. About 13 percent of Southwestern Bell's more than 1 million customers have an additional line. "In many cases, this will be the additional line people order instead the traditional telephone line." The five-state regional telephone company already has introduced the service in Missouri, Kansas and Texas, and will begin the service in Arkansas by year's end, said Charles Jones, director of telemedicine. The digital technology enables customers to use their single telephone with greater capability and flexibility "to surf the Internet or meet with a customer via desktop videocing and send information simultaneously," Dietz said. Southwestern Bell is able to enhance the copper wire already running into homes, Jones said. "It is like adding extra lanes on the highway," he said. The service replaces the current analog signal with a digital, he said. The digital signal has three channels. "We can combine two channels for data and voice at the same time, or we can combine video, voice and data on one channel and send data separately." The network, known as Integrated Services Digital Network, will fundamentally change the way Oklahoma businesses, schools and hospitals operate by giving them a network that makes access to colleagues, databases and other resources more efficient and productive. "With ISDN, customers can access information through the Internet up to 4.5 times faster than with today's fastest standard analog modems," he said. "ISDN technology can reduce the wait time for credit card authorizations for Oklahoma shoppers from an average 20 seconds to just 5 seconds." Oklahomans can use the DigiLine for a range of applications, including work at home, funds transfers at automatic teller machines, teleradiology, remote consultations by doctors and distance learning, Dietz said. "DigiLine especially is beneficial to small offices and home offices," he said." The prices for DigiLine ranges from $45.50 to $92.50 a month, depending on usage. There is a $250 one-time installation fee. Installation is free for customers with a two-year agreement, and $100 with a one-year agreement. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 00:17:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mac Beta Testers Needed - BellSouth.net Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Thu, 14 Nov 96 16:59:23 +0100 From: Guy Kawasaki Subject: Mac Beta testers needed - BellSouth.net Message-ID: <199611150100.RAA03684@dnai.com> This item is from: (Charlie Monroe) Thought you might want to post this e-mail I received today to the evangelist. I believe it is in response (partly) to an e-mail I sent them regarding lack of Mac service and the fact that it took me almost 15 minutes to port my account over to the Mac on my own! I have found the service to be "bullet-proof", and look forward to BellSouth's product. I encourage all evangelistas in the cities listed below to apply for Beta status. At the very least its probably 2 months of free service! Dear Mac User, BellSouth.net is pleased to announce the development of an exciting new product which allows Internet access for your Macintosh computer. This new software will allow Macintosh users to subscribe to the wide range of services available to BellSouth.net customers. Before releasing the software to the public, it must undergo extensive testing. BellSouth.net is interested in finding Macintosh users of every skill level to participate in this short-term, structured analysis of the new software. Macintosh beta testers will evaluate the software and let us know of any bugs which may exist. If chosen as a Beta tester, you will: ** Receive free, unlimited Internet access, including your own e-mail account, during the beta test period ** Be one of the first to use and see the new software ** Perform a structured usability/technical analysis of the software ** Provide the feedback which will allow us to enhance the product to meetcustomer needs. In order to become a beta tester you must meet the following requirements: 1. You are currently a BellSouth telephone customer or have a Visa or Mastercard (for registration purposes only, you will not incur any charges during the beta test). 2. Your Macintosh computer is running System 7.0 or higher and includes at least 8MB of RAM, 13MB of free hard disk space, and a 14.4Kbps or faster modem. 3. You are able to make a local, non-toll call to one of the following locations: Atlanta, GA (770) 300-8900 Charlotte, NC (704) 331-0136 Chattanooga, TN (423) 265-5045 Ft. Lauderdale, FL (954) 522-3610 Jacksonville, FL (904) 350-1090 Louisville, KY (502) 582-9225 Memphis, TN (901) 495-1700 Miami, FL (305) 374-2880 Nashville, TN (615) 254-8787 New Orleans, LA (504) 525-3398 Orlando, FL (407) 896-7275 Raleigh, NC (919) 685-9500 West Palm Bch, FL (407) 835-1220 If you meet the above requirements and are interested in becoming a beta tester, please respond via email to macbeta@multisoft.com by November 20, 1996. You must include the following information in your email: 1. Your name 2. Address 3. Telephone (optional) 4. The company you are employed with and your title 5. The approximate number of hours you spend per week on the Internet 6. The number of years experience you have working on Macintosh 7. The specific Mac model you are using (for example, Performa 6200, Quadra 840AV, Power Mac 8500, etc.) 8. The specific operating system you are running (for example, System 7.0, System 7.1, System 7.5, etc.) Qualifying beta testers will receive software and instructions via US mail by December 15. Thank you for your interest in BellSouth.net. ---------------- Do you believe in Macintosh? Please check out and join the EvangeList mailing list by sending an email to . ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 08:16:03 -0800 From: Marty Tennant Reply-To: marty@sccoast.net Organization: Low Tech Designs, Inc. Subject: Section 251 Failure to Negotiate I am in negotiations (if you can call it that) with several incumbent LECs regarding resale and access to unbundled network elements. After many months of back and forth discussions (mainly consisting of stonewalling on the behalf of the ILEC), I am now being asked to sign a bona fide request form which includes a section allowing the ILEC to bill me for the cost of preparing the unbundled network element charges. This charge would apply if I did or did not actually purchase the elements in question after I was given the prices. Evidently the company in question has had the bona fide request form approved by the State PUC in previous local competition proceedings. Obviously, the federal law must be followed in spite of the State action. As I understand the new law, and the rules and discussion contained in the FCC 251 Orders, (paragraph 156 specifically) ILECs are prohibited from asking for bona fide requests as part of the negotiation process, unless they are a rural carrier. The parties in question are not. The approach of the ILEC is that they are standing firm, and if I won't sign the bona fide request, including the authorization to bill for the preparation of the unbundled network elements, then I can take a legal or regulatory approach to resolving the dispute. I would appreciate hearing from other parties that might have confronted this same issue in their negotiations with incumbent LECs. I would particularly be interested in speaking with small entities that have been this route already. If you could email me personally with your telephone number, I'd appreciate the opportunity to talk. Many thanks in advance, Marty Tennant Low Tech Designs, Inc. New Neighborhood Networks(tm) marty@sccoast.net 803 527-4485 ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Slimy Pac-Bell Caller ID blocking ad Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 02:38:10 -0800 I have heard a really slimy, in fact downright deceptive, ad from Pacific Bell on the radio recently. It features these two friends who used to talk on the phone all the time, but then one of them gets Caller ID. The other one has full blocking on his line, so all the first one ever sees is "Private," so he doesn't ever answer the phone. The second guy doesn't understand why his friend is never home, and gets so desperate to talk to somebody that he starts calling the operator just to chat. The only solution, of course, is for the second guy to switch to Selective Blocking, because otherwise, all the people you call will ever see is "Private." Switching to selective blocking is free for a limited time. Absolutely no mention is made of *82, directly or obliquely. The clear statement is made unambiguously that the ONLY way to allow your number to go through to someone with Caller ID is to switch your line to Selective Blocking. If anyone from the CPUC is out there, this is definitely an ad for which Pacific Bell should be slammed against the wall. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ From: psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) Subject: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory! Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 04:10:39 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com Until recently, my *69 would not return 'out of area calls'. Last evening, that appears to have changed, at least with calls between SWBT/PacBell and Bell Atlantic. I received a call with no voice (probably modem), and the calling party refused to release the line from an off-hook state. After I finally terminated the call, (on a whim, just to see if it was one of the local kids), I hit *69 and to my surprise, the FULL ten-digit NANP of the calling party (in Houston) was returned to me. The LECs have finally begun to work together to get the information to the local level ... now on to cellular! :) John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 08:33:45 -0600 From: David Loomis Subject: Re: Telco Loophole Exempts ISP's From Fees? Fred R. Goldstein wrote: > The "exemption" was to the Carrier Common Line Charges (CCLC), not to > Subscriber Line Charges (SLCs) which are charged to the non-carrier > *subscribers*. You pay one or the other. This is the way the FCC > administers the jurisdictional separations required under the 1927 > Supreme Court ruling Smith v. Illinois Bell. Fred, just to nit pick, both the SLC and the CCLC are jurisdictionally separated as "interstate costs" and are recovering the costs of the local loop. When the FCC was deciding on how to recover these costs, they originally wanted all the costs recovered through the CCLC (charge per minute). Economists (like myself) wanted the costs recovered by the SLC (charge per month regardless of usage). The FCC struck a compromise and uses both. You are right that you are either one both not both (at least not directly). If you're an end-user, you pay SLC. If you're a carrier, you pay CCLC. Smith v. Illinois states that some of the local costs should be recovered through interstate rates but declines to say how or how much. Hope my nit picking helped. David G. Loomis Email: dloomis@ilstu.edu Illinois State University Voice: (309) 438-7979 Department of Economics FAX: (309) 438-5228 Campus Box 4200 Normal, IL 61790-4200 Web Site: http://odin.cmp.ilstu.edu/~dloomis/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 10:37:25 -0500 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Mayhem! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if anyone has looked at that > possibility where TWA Flight 800 was concerned, or in the situation where > the two airplanes which collided over India last week? GSM is common > enough in many parts of the world after all; isn't it possible that a > GSM phone might have been accidentally left turned on with resulting > problems in the navigation of the aircraft? PAT] Perhaps this could be a possibility in the India collision (though the last I heard on that was a lot of fingerpointing between the Indian air controllers and Kazak Air). But I can't see how it would apply to the TWA explosion, which had nothing to do with navigational equipment (the plane exploded in mid-air, not after hitting another aircraft or the ocean). The three theories under investigation are bomb, missile, and equipment failure. From what I've read, investigators are now becoming extremely doubtful about either of the first two scenarios; no definite bomb telltales have been found, and enough of the wreckage has now been reassembled for them to determine that no missile-sized punctures were made in the aircraft (supposedly, any hole larger than about an inch across has been ruled out). Some investigators now say that a fuel explosion in a near-empty fuel tank is the likeliest candidate. Of course, none of this stops a techno-clueless pseudo-journalist like Pierre Salinger from dredging up some months-old conspiracy dreck (the US Navy shot it down!) from the Internet and then breathlessly holding a press conference to publicize his "findings". Sheesh. On this general topic, but with a different chilling telephonic note, a story I read in yesterday's paper covered the release of the transcript of the last few minutes of the ValuJet plane that crashed into the Florida Everglades earlier this year. (The cause of this crash has been definitely pinned on oxygen canisters that exploded as a result of being improperly labeled and packed.) In addition to covering the transcript itself, the story mentioned that one unidentified passenger had used his cell phone to place a final call to his wife before the plane crashed (it was at an altitude of 7000 to 8000 feet all but the last minute or two). Despite inquiries from FAA investigators hoping for more information about the fire, the wife has chosen not to divulge any information about her husband's final words. I certainly sympathize with her. Probably the person who understands best how she feels is the widow of the renowned New Zealander mountain climber who perished on Everest a number of months ago (along with a number of other people). Trapped in a storm and dying of exposure and lack of oxygen, he was able to reach a base camp by radio. They succeeded in patching him for a final phone call to his pregnant wife back home in NZ. Tragic. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may have read with reference to our (Chicago area) Cardinal Joseph Bernardin who died this past week that his final phone call -- a matter of an hour or so before he died -- came from President Clinton who wished him well. He was very weak and unable to hold the telephone himself; one of his associates held the phone up to his ear while Clinton chatted with him for just a minute or so. PAT] ------------------------------ From: weave@hopi.dtcc.edu (Ken Weaverling) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 20 Nov 1996 12:22:02 -0500 Organization: Delaware Technical & Community College > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Compuserve very kindly provides me with > a connection at no charge to telnet to lcs.mit.edu via a local phone > number here in Skokie. I shouldn't complain too much or too loudly I > guess. I dial into a local number, connect to their network and issue > a certain command to then reach MIT or other .edu sites where I am a > guest user. But some days it is awfully slow. The pipe between Compuserve and the net appears pretty clogged. I have traversed this in numerous ways and noticed the horrible delays myself. This includes: *) PPP link through compuserve POP, telnet out to the net; *) TTY link through compuserve POP, go telnet, then out to the net; *) TTY link via telnet INTO compuserve.com from the net; *) CIS client in my office, going through the net to get to CIS. AOL now offers discounts to subscribers who use ISP or other net means to get to their system and do NOT use AOL POPs. If CIS follows this lead, their line to the net will get even worse. Of course, perhaps now that Spamford Wallace can't use CIS to funnel his unwanted junk, things will get better! Ken Weaverling, Delaware Tech (WHOIS: KJW) * finger weave@ssnet.com for my PGP key. * weave@hopi.dtcc.edu http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/weave/ * [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you the amount of inbound spam to Compuserve mailboxes has gotten worse than ever the past few weeks. CIS has *never* supported any form of multiple outgoing mail to the net, so very little junk-email ever leaves from them. One of their tech support people told me yesterday that they are now working on a mail filter similar to the one installed by AOL in the hopes of cutting if off there also. You are right; their pipeline is very clogged but I am not really in a position at this time to do anything about it or make any changes in my own operations. I am barely surviving now, let alone having to face the prospect of large fees to connect to the net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: George Hills Subject: Re: Sudden New Feature on Home Phone Line Date: 20 Nov 1996 12:11:19 GMT Organization: University of Newcastle upon Tyne nilsphone@aol.com wrote: > (In Europe, and when using cellphones, this works differently, and you > typically can hit some number to switch to "first", "second" and > "both", and even disconnect "first", "second" and "both". I do not > believe this is well standardized. BT currently charge GBP 4 (US: $6) per quarter for unlimited use of 3-way calling. At the moment there is a promotion running which means *everyone* on an exchange which supports it has unlimited free use of 3-way - after 1/1/97 they'll charge 50p (US : 75c) per use to people who don't chose to pay the quarterly rental charge. During a call: Recall (R)-0 drop waiting call (if call waiting beeps a waiting call at you) (BT don't seem to advertise this, but it works everywhere) R-1 finish current call and switch to waiting call R-2 shuttle between two calls (puts one caller on hold and lets you talk to the other - this is how you "answer" a call which is waiting without hanging up on your other call) R-3 Conference together 2 calls (unfortunatly you can't conference 2 incoming calls together, the second call has to be an outgoing call - may be some areas where you can do this, but it's undocumented) R-4 Conference 2 calls together and disconnect self (undocumented - I've never seen this working) R-5 Drop first call in a 3-way call R-6 Put first call in a 3-way call back on hold (undocumented - doesn't work here) R-7 Drop second call in a 3-way call R-8 Put second call in a 3-way call back on hold (as R-6) These are fairly standard -- most people's home lines are BT provided; some cable companies may use different codes. On cellular phones it is different again -- the different networks support various separate features in different ways. George ------------------------------ From: Ian Angus Subject: Re: Book Review: "The Complete Internet Business Toolkit" Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 09:07:41 -0500 Organization: Angus TeleManagement Group Rob Slade wrote a review of: > "The Complete Internet Business Toolkit", Schwartau/Goggans, 1996, > 0-442-02222-0 > %A Winn Schwartau winn@infowar.com > %A Chris Goggans chris@fc.net Rob Slade's review of this book was, as usual, brief and to the point. But I'm more interested in the authors. This appears to be a business book written by (1) a prominent consultant in network security, and (2) a former editor of the infamous hacker newsletter Phrack. Internet publishing certainly makes strange bedfellows! IAN ANGUS ianangus@angustel.ca Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca 8 Old Kingston Road tel: 905-686-5050 ext 222 Ajax ON L1T 2Z7 Canada fax: 905-686-2655 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #626 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 20 15:06:04 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id PAA06458; Wed, 20 Nov 1996 15:06:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 15:06:04 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611202006.PAA06458@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #627 TELECOM Digest Wed, 20 Nov 96 15:06:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 627 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cellular Calls and Calling Card's Role in Solving Murder (Tad Cook) IMTC VOIP Forum - The Full Release (Toby Nixon) Yikes! Another Net-Pedophile Scare (Tad Cook) Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades (jjskord@erols.com) Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN (Leonard Erickson) '555' Numbers on Television (Linc Madison) Re: Ameritech Questions (Paul Palley) Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs (mexitech@netcom.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cellular Calls and Calling Card's Role in Solving Murder Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 10:18:14 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Detective turns cold trail hot -- Killing: A suspect commits suicide as police close in on 2-year-old case. By Alan Gathright Mercury News Staff Writer When the body of Lance Burgess was found washed up on Pescadero Beach two years ago, all the detective had to go on was a crumpled note found in the victim's pocket, scrawled with a phony name. It became a classic murder mystery, pitting a dogged detective against a brilliantly warped and violent con man who had dozens of identities. The clues: the note, the victim's cellular phone and an anonymously purchased phone card. It ended Monday when a self-described "prince of thieves" died of the cyanide he swallowed as he was about to take a lie detector test in the case -- two years to the day after Burgess' body was found. When detective Sgt. Ray Richardson first questioned Anthony Joseph Yokley, an ex-con with a long history of violent scams and mental illness, the suspect stayed cool, bragging to investigators: "Will you two shake hands with the devil himself?" But as Richardson closed in, the suspect lost his nerve. After volunteering to take a lie-detector test during a meeting with investigators at a friend's Belmont business last week, Yokley stepped into a bathroom, swallowed cyanide pills and collapsed. Richardson said he had planned to arrest Yokley, 53, for murdering the Humboldt County contractor after luring the victim to San Francisco in order to steal his red Porsche Turbo Carrera. On Tuesday, San Mateo County Sheriff Don Horsley lauded the veteran detective for the creative, relentless pursuit that's been the hallmark of his 25-year career on about 100 homicides. "All he had to go on was a crumpled-up piece of paper," the sheriff said. "But every time I'd ask him, `Do you think you have a chance of cracking this case?' Ray would say: `I'm sure I'm going to get him.' " Yokley was a one-man crime wave with a 20-year record of bank robbery, kidnapping and complex forgery and car-theft scams. His favorite method was to pose as a wealthy man responding to newspaper advertisements of people selling expensive luxury cars and use forged cashier's checks to rip off the car and quickly resell it. He would often handcuff and brutally beat his victims, court records reveal. In a search of Yokley's van after the poisoning, investigators found the tools of his bizarre trade: a "blowgun survival weapon" and darts, an M-1 rifle, 24 plastic handcuffs, more than 30 fake identification cards, prepaid "time-only" telephone credit cards, two police badges, counterfeit money and equipment and books for making bogus cashier's checks and IDs. A diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, Yokley on several occasions was found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity and spent years in mental institutions. On probation - At the time of Burgess's slaying in November 1994, Yokley was on probation for forgery in the 1986 theft of a Porsche in Modesto. When federal agents arrested him in Seattle in the Modesto case, he was carrying two handguns and cyanide pills, but he was seized before he could swallow the poison. Yokley met his match in Richardson, who is renowned for his slightly rumpled, low-key Columbo-esque style. Richardson has cracked some of the Peninsula's most notorious killings, including the recent arrest of a Menlo Park man charged with murdering two elderly men in Atherton and Menlo Park. Burgess was a respected McKinleyville contractor who was lured to his death by a man posing as the rich co-owner of San Francisco's historic Palace Hotel -- the hotel is actually owned by a Japanese firm -- who offered $50,000 for the red Porsche that Burgess had advertised for $39,000. The man who identified himself as "David Silverman" agreed to fly his "private airplane" to meet Burgess at a Eureka hotel. Although Burgess was suspicious, he agreed to deliver the sports car to the Palace Hotel on Nov. 18, 1994, in exchange for a cashier's check. Body found next day - Burgess' body, with handcuff marks on the wrists, was found bobbing in the surf off Pescadero Beach the next morning. He had drowned after being viciously beaten. In the pocket of his blue jeans, investigators found their first clue, a note in someone else's handwriting, reading: "Sheraton Palace Hotel, Market and New Montgomery Streets, SF, 2:00, David Silverman." The Porsche was found parked at San Jose International Airport in January 1995. After a year of dead-end leads, Richardson got a break in late 1995 when he learned how to trace incoming calls to a cellular phone. He remembered that Silverman had called Burgess' cell phone. Phone calls checked - In dozens of search warrants served on telecommunications firms in California, Oregon and Washington, Richardson discovered that Burgess had been called by someone using a "time-only" phone card that anyone can buy at a convenience store. The anonymous card doesn't identify its user, but the detective could track the 11 calls credited to the card and the phones from which the card user had called. One of the calls was made from the Palace Hotel. Another of the calls was to a Sacramento woman, who said it was from a boyfriend "with a dark past." She originally knew him as Frank Kennedy. But Secret Service agents had identified him as Yokley. From the Secret Service, Richardson got samples of Yokley's handwriting and learned that "his (criminal) M.O. matched to a `T' what happened to Lance Burgess." Two handwriting experts confirmed that Yokley had written the Silverman note found on the body. Richardson also traced Yokley to an Oakland apartment, where a witness remembered a red Porsche being parked there by someone visiting a former crime partner of Yokley's. End of the line - On Nov. 8, Richardson finally questioned Yokley at his home near Petaluma. Yokley denied knowing Burgess, but he became unnerved by the mounting evidence against him, and Richardson told him: "Tony, you're not telling the truth and we know it." Yokley agreed to take the lie-detector test Nov. 12. Posturing, he asked Richardson to "shake hands with the devil himself." Richardson said he stuck with the case because "it was one of the most fascinating in my career" and because he felt a duty to Burgess' family members, whom he came to know well during the probe. "This was a decent man who was married to a wonderful woman and had two beautiful daughters," the detective said. "He was totally lured into this and killed." Now, Richardson has only one more step in closing the case: He'll fly to Humboldt County next week to meet Burgess' widow and children to help them "get closure" on the death of their loved one. ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: IMTC VOIP Forum - The Full Release Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 10:35:19 -0800 I saw a small, edited version of the VOIP Forum announcement in V16 #620. Here's the entire press release, FYI. Note that VOIP is not a stand-alone organization; it is an activity group of the International Multimedia Telecommunications Consortium (IMTC). FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For further information, contact: Jacki Katzman or Jessica Solodar Rogers Communications +1.617.224.1100 jkatzman@rogerscom.com jsolodar@rogerscom.com Deepak Kamlani IMTC, Inc. +1.510.277.1320 dkamlani@inventures.com World Wide Web: http://www.imtc.org VOICE OVER IP FORUM TO ESTABLISH INTEROPERABILITY GUIDELINES FOR TELEPHONY OVER THE INTERNET AND IP DATA NETWORKS 40 Telephony and Computer Vendors Affiliate with IMTC, Develop Specification for Interoperability Between Internet Voice Products DALLAS, Nov.12, 1996 - Forty prominent telephony and computer vendors are meeting here today to specify technical guidelines for enabling interoperability between Internet voice communications products. The meeting was organized by the Voice over IP Forum, a recently founded vendor group that has just joined the International Multimedia Teleconferencing Consortium (IMTC), Inc. The VoIP Forum is dedicated to enabling and promoting industry-wide interoperability between products that send telephony over the Internet and private IP enterprise networks. This interoperability will allow seamless transmission of Internet phone calls regardless of the telephony application used by callers and call recipients. At present, applications from different vendors are incompatible due to fundamental differences in voice coding, silence suppression, addressing and dialing plans, call management and other related functions. To facilitate product interoperability, the VoIP Forum is creating a master guideline and reference model, called the Service Interoperability Implementation Agreement, that includes both Internet telephony client software and gateways to the public telephone network. The vendor group, which was founded in May 1996, will now carry on its mission as an activity group of the IMTC. "The IMTC and the VoIP Forum are working toward many common goals, with many shared technologies and areas of interest, so it makes sense for us to officially join with the IMTC," said Michael Knappe, VoIP Forum chairman. "No complete set of standards exists that satisfies the requirements for real-time telephony over the Internet and over private IP networks. We are seeking participation from any company working towards seamless interoperability and a high quality of service." Founders of the VoIP Forum include 3Com, Action Consulting, Cisco Systems, Creative Labs, Dialogic, MICOM Communications, Microsoft, NetSpeak, Nortel, Nuera Communications, Octel, U.S. Robotics, Vienna Systems, VocalTec and Voxware. The VoIP specification will initially define two-party voice and other audio communications for compatibility with traditional telephone service networks via telephony / IP gateways. Guidelines for extended functionality, such as multi-party conference calls and fax support, will be included in later revisions. "Internet telephony is poised for tremendous market growth, provided the vendors offer interoperable, open products." said Neil Starkey, president of the IMTC. "The Voice over IP Forum addresses a pressing need shared by end users and the telephony and conferencing vendors. We're delighted to welcome VoIP members to the IMTC." The VoIP Forum will coordinate efforts with a second IMTC activity group that is enabling interoperability of Internet telephony products based on the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) H.323 standard. The H.323 standard defines protocols for transmission of video, voice and data over an IP network. The IMTC's H.323 activity group, which in October held the first interoperability testing event for H.323-based multimedia conferencing products, will incorporate into its implementation guidelines the full telephony service requirements developed by the VoIP Forum. The Voice over IP Forum was founded in May 1996 to ensure product interoperability and a high quality of service for Internet telephony products. The group's mission is to define and promote a simple implementation agreement, in an open forum setting, for voice and voiceband data traffic over an IP network. In October 1996, the VoIP Forum joined the IMTC and now operates as one of the IMTC's activity groups. The IMTC (http://www.imtc.org) is a non-profit organization promoting the ongoing development and adoption of international standards for interoperable, multipoint data and video conferencing. The San Ramon, Calif.-based consortium includes more than 100 members and associates from 20 countries. Membership is open to any interested party, including vendors of audio, document, and video teleconferencing hardware and software; communications companies; teleconferencing service providers; end users; academic institutions; government agencies; and non-profit organizations. ------------------------------ Subject: Yikes! Another Net-Pedophile Scare Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 23:06:20 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This one could be retitled 'Another Bogus Story About the Net'. I got this yesterday and was going to just trash it without using it at all but then I thought what teh heck; it has been a couple weeks or so since we had a story about the clever pedophiles. I am sure Melissa Matczak is pleased with her work ... let's read it together now. PAT] Prison Pedophiles' Online List a Parents' Nightmare By MELISSA MATCZAK Associated Press Writer MINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- When Sandy Baso's children were growing up, they basked in the limelight of little Eagle Bend, population 524. Her daughter was crowned Snow Day's Queen, and her son took part in spelling bees and the Knowledge Bowl. As in many small towns, the community newspaper recorded the children's achievements with photographs and glowing articles. "In a small town, you can almost watch someone's children grow up through the newspaper," Baso said. Neighbors weren't the only ones watching. At a prison near Minneapolis, someone was using Baso's hometown newspaper and others to compile a catalog of children, apparently for pedophiles. It includes personal details such as "latchkey kid," "speech difficulties," "cute" and "Little Ms. pagent winner," The New York Times said Monday. The catalog includes 3,000 children from 67 mostly small towns around northern Minnesota and runs to 52 pages in a computer printout obtained by the Times, the newspaper said. Investigators found the list -- including Baso's children -- on a computer used by a convicted pedophile working in a prison business. The same computer was used to exchange messages and pornographic images with pedophiles on the Internet. There are no allegations the list was used in any crimes. "I was worried about my daughter away at school," Baso said upon learning of the list. "You start thinking, are they stalking her? I thought back to the many times my children rode their bicycle to T-ball." "It's an invasion of privacy," Kari Lehmann, a mother of two girls in the town of Fertile, told the Grand Forks (N.D.) Herald. "Our children aren't safe. They should have contacted the parents on that list. We should have known." The FBI investigation is looking at George Gerald Chamberlain, who at the time the list was compiled was at the medium-security state prison at Lino Lakes for abusing teen-age girls, the Times said. Chamberlain was computer manager for Insight Inc., a prison business in programming and telemarketing that had a Fortune 500 client list. The FBI and the Minnesota Department of Corrections would not comment Monday on the case. Chamberlain has maintained his innocence, and a state prison disciplinary hearing in 1995 cleared him of any wrongdoing. Chamberlain's attorney, Jordan Kushner, said the list and the pornographic materials were linked to another inmate, William Arthur Couture, who also worked for Insight and had a reputation as a computer genius. Couture has since been paroled. "Once this stuff got discovered, the person who was responsible shifted the blame onto him," Kushner said. The computer business has since reopened under the management of non-inmates, and the prisoners no longer have Internet access. Michael Moore, editor of the weekly Fertile Journal, said names and dates on the list matched those in "Citizens of Tomorrow" -- an annual spread featuring photos of children in the community. The list included Moore's daughter, who was 8 months old when it was compiled, and his two boys. Moore told the Herald: "I felt violated, betrayed, when I learned about the list." But he added that the last entry on the list involving someone from Fertile was made in 1991 and that nothing harmful has ever occurred. Moore said the paper will continue to publish the annual feature and other community news considered a staple of small-town weeklies. Diane Silbernagel, who edits and publishes Eagle Bend's Independent News Herald with her husband, said that is the approach her paper will take. "You can't just quit doing it because you've had an unfortunate situation," she said. "You're a bit careful and hope it was an isolated incident." Others downplayed the computer connection. Bruce Koball, an engineering consultant in Berkeley, Calif., said the incident is not much different from others where prisoners conduct scams through the mail or by phone. "The Internet is really a sideline," he said. "I would object to painting it as some evil tool that has suddenly facilitated a new form of crime. This guy was compiling this stuff in the 1970s in notebooks." ------------------------------ From: jjskord@erols.com Subject: Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 01:43:21 GMT Organization: Erol's Internet Services Bill, all, There are several reasons to switch to a 5ESS: 1. Better support for more class services; 2. Better support for ISDN; 3. Modular upgrades to SONET and ATM connections to the IECs (AT&T) etc; 4. Cost of software/hardware upkeep on older switch; 5. Software upgrades may end soon for that switch; 6. Area has increase in customers and new switch can carry more traffic; 7. Optical remotes and other services can be provided to businesses; 8. Leased line integrated support for things like Frame Relay, SMDS. Just some thoughts, JJS ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Plan May Divide Spring Hill, TN Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 18:48:47 PST Organization: Shadownet Dale Neiburg writes: >> Nov. 5--Life in Spring Hill -- already complicated because the town >> straddles Williamson and Maury counties -- will get even more complex >> if a new area code splits the community. > According to my Rand McNally atlas, Spring Hill has a population of > less than 1100. Do they really have two COs? How old is that atlas? Spring Hill is now moderately famous as the location of the plant that manufactures the "Saturn" line of automobiles. Betcha the town has grown a *lot* in recent years. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: '555' Numbers on Television Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 03:16:35 -0800 On this week's "Simpsons" episode, Homer concocts a fake kidnapping scheme with Larry Burns, Mr. Burns' long-lost son, and phones in the ransom demand. The police have a trace on the line. As soon as Homer hangs up, the Police Chief Wiggam turns to a police officer named Eddie. CHIEF: Beautiful. Eddie, did you trace the phone number? EDDIE: Sure did, Chief. [hands the chief a slip of paper] CHIEF: Five-five-five ... aw, geez, that's gotta be phony. [crumples the paper and throws it into the fireplace] Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ From: palley@worldnet.att.net (Paul Palley) Subject: Re: Ameritech Questions Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 05:03:42 -0600 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services In article , eric@fudge.uchicago.edu (Eric Fischer) wrote: > I received a postcard in the mail from Ameritech a few days ago with a > list of the exchanges being moved to 773. It's rather long, or I'd > type it in here. Anyway, I assume other Ameritech customers will also > be getting these in the near future (if Chicago's postal service can > be trusted). Ameritech also publishes a prefix list at: http://www.ameritech.com/news/service/areacode/illinois_prefix773.html Paul Palley Chicago, IL ------------------------------ From: mexitech@netcom.com (Patrick) Subject: Re: Question For Bell-Owned ISPs Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 19:13:05 GMT Bill Sohl (billsohl@planet.net) wrote: > Joe Jensen wrote: >> Craig Nordin wrote: >>> I would love to find out what the Bell-owned ISPs say about this ISP >>> vs. Bell issue (ISPs said to cause telco gridlock). Who trusts what they say anyway. They have had twenty years to get ready for ISDN, they spent that time manuevering. It is also true that companies such as AT&T went to the FCC saying the callback industry was going to kill them off, and now they are part of it. In particular, Peter Townsend's internal study for AT&T, which led to the breakup of the Bell System was based on the fact that they could make more money in a non-regulated environment. The consent decree was just a commentary to the issue already arrived at by the Bell System. The switching controversy may be real, but I would think such things as more iSDN, Centrex, Frame Relay and other techniques could unload most of their problems. The real issue, can they get the money for the offload. Databroadcast techniques, and a whole host of wireless technologies are going to make the majors pay for their stupidity. Lots of bandwidth available that doesn't rely on the phone company. >> I would venture to say that the technical folks dealing with the >> traffic issues relative to ISP access have never talked to the >> Bell-owned ISPs. For example, in one Bell company I am familiar with, >> the engineering function isn't in the same state as the internet >> service provider entity. They probably haven't read any of their history either. > This still doesn't offer any insight into the paradox that the > situation presents ... i.e. the same telco that complains about long > holding times has a business unit that is one of the alleged creators > of the problem. > That's one possibility, others (eg. non-blocking switches) also exist > or are in development. ISDN is supposed to be non-blocking. >> Both ADSL and cable modems provide a reasonable solution to >> this problem. The telcos are in a bind. Do they spend the time and >> money to reengineer the switch only to have the traffic pulled off when >> new the new technology arrives? I am glad I don't have to answer that >> question, but as a cableco anticipating offering internet access over >> cable modems next year, I am certainly willing to help. It is being answered for them, investment tax credits would hurry the process along, but look what happened in Digital Television in just a little over a year, wireless is going to be the next wave and blow a whole bunch of erlang and spreadsheet figures all to hell and back. Patrick mexitech@netcom.com Moderation is a fatal thing, Nothing succeeds like excess! -Oscar Wilde ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #627 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 20 22:03:25 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA15184; Wed, 20 Nov 1996 22:03:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 22:03:25 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611210303.WAA15184@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #628 TELECOM Digest Wed, 20 Nov 96 22:03:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 628 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization (Nils Andersson) Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Nils Andersson) Re: Payphone Deregulation (mreiney@hevanet.com) Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades (John Nagle) Re: Nuisance Calls From Newspaper (Robert Bulmash) Re: Catching An Annoying Caller (Robert Bulmash) Re: Catching An Annoying Caller (dstott@uswest.com) Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? (Tim Russell) Employment Opportunity: SS7 Help (Tim McKegney via Babu Mengelepouti) Looking for PBX Beta Testers (US Robotics Access Corp.) Interconnection Arbitrations (James Hinkle) Net Congestion (Leonard Erickson) Documentation Needed For Stromberg Carlson E120 (Sal Vaclav) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization Date: 20 Nov 1996 19:06:56 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , isw@hdvs.com (Isaac Wingfield) writes: > (and also under abnormal) conditions, just how close are the clocks of > different telcos locked together? If there is asychrony, is it a > problem at the DS-0 level? That is, if a domestic unit is taking voice > samples using telco #1's clock, can the samples be used to build DS-1 > frames at telco B, which has a (slightly) different clock? For a test of how great telcos are, try this: First call the US Naval Observatory, +1-202-762 1401 to get the right time. Then call GTE at +1-805-495 1811. Read'm and weep. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com (Jeffrey Rhodes) Subject: Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization Date: Wed, 20 Nov 96 12:36:02 PDT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. In article , writes: > Isaac Wingfield wrote: >> I'm involved with the IEEE committee which is setting standards for >> cable modems (data over cable-TV networks). One type of data to be >> carried over these networks is digital telephony. I understand that >> there is a need for a precise (loop timed) 8 KHz reference in the >> domestic unit. The trick is to decide how to deliver this reference, >> and how many are needed. I will contradict all the learned citations you have received so far and offer my anecdotal experience with synchronization. First, any telco has their own Atomic Clock (usually tuned to the Cesium electron valence excitation frequency) to distribute as well as possible within their own network a Stratum 1 source signal. Often a T-1 source from telco is used for LAN/WAN source timing and I have noticed that Newbridge WAN networks are able to have source timing from different carriers and yet still be able to deliver a 64kbps clear channel which I have used for transport of SS7 data links between nodes at different sites within a corporate WAN. That said, that things can't help but seem to work for data/voice at 64kbps provided each end is using Stratum1 clock sources, let me expound even further: I have seen more than one lab network using Stratum3 source timing for each node in the lab network, and while the T-1s report slips, they are not significant enough to cause a yellow alarm. The worst I've ever seen it get is when one node was running on its own Stratum3 clock (slow) and another node was running on a different Stratum3 clock (fast) and the 56kbps rate adapted 64kbps clear channel used for the SS7 data link would bounce every 10 minutes or so. Yes, the link is not perfect, but the errors are not so frequent that a packet protocol will not be able to resend bad or unacknowledged packets within the "window" of its flow control. Don't worry about timing. A Swatch watch crystal is probably good enough for a cable modem to bridge 64kbps digital voice telephony back into the circuit switched network. You heard it here first. Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com and jeffrey.rhodes@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: 20 Nov 1996 19:06:55 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , jack@novagate.com (Jack Decker) writes: [Lots of stuff about 800 from payphones, who pays for the payphone?} > I wonder if the F.C.C. is trying to kill pay phones entirely? Because > soon they will be of little value to many people, particularly if > cellular (and PCS) rates continue to decrease. I largely agree with Decker. I would propose that the solution be to split the service, one type of toll-free being totally toll-free to the caller (and the callee may have to pick up the 35c), another requiring coin same as for a local call to access the toll-free number (this is the case in many European countries, toll free requires coin, but is usually unlimited time, whereas local calls even when local calls are not). An easy way to do this split without having to do an awful lot of handshaking would be to use the 800/888/88X splits, and e.g. designate 800 to be ALWAYS toll free to the caller, and 888 to be coin-required on payphones. As to the quote above, I suspect the feds want to get rid of pay phones, never mind that they are usually used by the "little guy" that the govt professes to want to protect. The "war" on drugs and any other "crime" is used as an excuse for the feds to do whatever they like. There is nothing like declaring a national emergency for usurping power. The 10th (and 9th) Amendment forever!!!! Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: mreiney@hevanet.com Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 15:24:58 -0800 Organization: Hevanet Communications Reply-To: mreiney@hevanet.com Dave Levenson wrote: > Those who were at the receiving end of the subsidies that were built > into the regulated system will probably pay more; those who paid may > pay less. In general, competition drives prices closer to costs. In general, deregulation leads to splittig services, more people to feed in more food chains, loss of economies of scale and higher total overhead costs. I'll grant that competition also leads to more features (extra cost) too. I wonder what breakfast cereal would cost if the cost of competition (mostly advertising) was zero. Ditto for automobiles, beer ... the list is endless. ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 21:56:11 GMT Ed Ellers writes: > Given that these switches were designed for a much longer service life > -- forty years is a number I've seen in Bell System literature from > the 1960s, when the 1ESS was introduced -- is it really justifiable > for BellSouth to force ratepayers to pay for new switches so soon? The big win on converting to newer switches has for some years been real estate. The newer switches are so much smaller that it's often possible to sell off buildings after upgrading, which generates revenue that can be taken as immediate profit. Here in Palo Alto, the oldest big telco building was sold to DEC a few years ago, and after a few years as offices, it's now being converted to an "Internet central office", where providers can co-locate servers. John Nagle ------------------------------ From: prvtctzn@aol.com (Robert Bulmash) Subject: Re: Nuisance Calls From Newspaper Date: 18 Nov 1996 22:28:00 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , Bob@BCI.NBN.com (Bob Schwartz) writes: > The last caller stated that she would take me off the "list" but that > other telemarketing firms had been hired by the same newspaper and > that I may still be called by another telemarketing company with the > same or similar offer. > Can anyone advise me of what's right in this situation. Once you tell a firm that calls your residence not to call you again with sales solicitations, any further calls to you for the same product or service is a violation of federal law (the TCPA). I suggest that you ask the newspaper for a copy of their `written do-not-call policy. If the do not make it available to you upon demand, they will owe you $500 under the law. That should get their attention. Bob Bulmash Private Citizen, Inc. http://webmill.com/pci/home http://webmill.com/prvtctzn/home ------------------------------ From: prvtctzn@aol.com (Robert Bulmash) Subject: Re: Catching An Annoying Caller Date: 18 Nov 1996 22:27:57 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10) In article , dtarcza@ix.netcom.com (Derek J Tarcza) writes: > For about the last year, I've been getting hang-up calls and they just > don't seem to quit. Lately they've been happening 4-5 times a week, but > were a little bit less earlier this year. No matter how many rings i > wait before answering the phone, I always hear the circuit > disconnecting then dead silence. > Caller ID is no help: Out-Of-Area. Same with *57: No Can Do ... Is > there any other service that I can get to trace this call? Is there > any offering of ANI for this type of situation? The type of call you are getting is likely the result of a `predictive dialer' which is calling you and then hanging up when no telemarketer is available to talk to you. Earlier this year, one of our members collected over $9,000 from a firm in Washington state for the very same circumstance using a predictive dialer. File a police report. Then, ask your telco to put a trap on your line. If they refuse, tell them your getting hang-up calls that you believe are the result of someone stalking you, or attempting to determine when you are not home, so they can burglarize you. You will thus force the telco to comply with the trap request. When the telco gets the originating number, they will give it to your local police department for investigation. Of course, the cops won't do much with the report. After the cops are finnished investigating, file a Freedom of Information Act request (your state attorney general should have info on such FOIA requests) with the police, asking the cops to turn over their files (including the calling number) concerning their investigation. You will then have the calling firm's number ... and alot of fun ... and maybe money. If you need help with the process, or any questions, call me at 1/630-393-2370. Bob Bulmash Private Citizen, Inc. http://webmill.com/pci/home http://webmill.com/prvtctzn/home ------------------------------ From: dstott@uswest.com Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 13:46:33 -0600 Subject: Re: Catching An Annoying Caller In TELECOM Digest #620, Derek J Tarcza (DTarcza@ix.netcom.com) writes: > For about the last year, I've been getting hang-up calls and they just > dont seem to quit. Lately they've been happening 4-5 times a week, but > were a little bit less earlier this year. No matter how many rings i > wait before answering the phone, I always hear the circuit > disconnecting then dead silence. > Caller ID is no help: Out-Of-Area. Same with *57: No Can Do ... Is > there any other service that I can get to trace this call? Is there > any offering of ANI for this type of situation? Here at U S WEST, *52 does the trick. It traps the last call, sends the number to the local police department, and costs about $2.00. Call your phone company and see if they have something comparable. stott [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think what he referred to as *57 is what you are referring to as *52. Also, if a call is not identifiable with conventional methods, i.e. caller-id, return last call, etc, then I do not think it will be available with *52/*57 either. It will probably have to be obtained via a specific effort by telco using a trap on the line. Bob Bulmash in the message before this recommend that course of action also, but something he neglected to mention was that Ameritech at least -- maybe other telcos also -- require a signed statement from their customer authorizing telco to turn the evidence over to the police, *and* promising to follow up by signing a complaint with the police once the results of the trap are turned over. Normally the police will not disclose the results of the trap (and telco will never do so) without a signed complaint and the commencement of prose- cution. Bob also feels the results of the trap can be obtained by filing suit under FOIA, but I do not think so. 'Ongoing police investigations' are never available under FOIA for obvious reasons. The catch-22 is then that telco only will do the trap and release the results at all if you promise to prosecute. Telco says they are not going to serve as your private detective agency or skip-tracing service, etc. Now we know statistically that the overwhelming majority of harrassing calls where the party simply rings your telephone and hangs up without speaking are made by people *known or related to* the party being harrassed. A relative, a 'friend', a former/current lover, someone who wants to know what is going on. Yes, I suppose a certain number of those cases could come from predictive dialers but those would usually be over a period of several hours or perhaps several days, but not for months on end. So before you order a trap and possibly commit to getting the police involved, *make certain* you will be happy with the end results and not possibly getting a relative arrested or former employee, etc. Ameritech for one simply will not do a trap/trace without the assurance you will cooperate and not leave them hanging where a possible violation of the calling party's privacy is concerned. PAT] ------------------------------ From: russell@probe.net (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: Higher ISP Fees at Peak Hours? Date: 20 Nov 1996 21:05:07 GMT Organization: Probe Technology Internet Services > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Compuserve very kindly provides me with > a connection at no charge to telnet to lcs.mit.edu via a local phone > number here in Skokie. I shouldn't complain too much or too loudly I > guess. I dial into a local number, connect to their network and issue > a certain command to then reach MIT or other .edu sites where I am a > guest user. But some days it is awfully slow. Oh geez! No /wonder/ you're seeing slow access times, Patrick. Do us all a favor, and the next time you're talking about how slow the net is, make sure you're not talking about dialing up to a national provider, especially Compu$erve. You're not dialing up to the net, you're dialing up to a pitifully slow X.25 packet-switched network, which is then (slowly) getting you to an Internet connection which is probably swamped. Find a local provider with a good connection, THEN tell us all how pitifully slow the net is. Shame on you, you should know better. Tim Russell System Admin, Probe Technology email: russell@probe.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wish I could Tim. I really do. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 16:05:06 EST From: Babu Mengelepouti Subject: Employment Opportunity: SS7 Help I wonder how many other people got this ... especially since I'm a college student and am not really in a position to be much help in finding a senior SS7 engineer etc ... :) dialtone@vcn.bc.ca ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 11:43:06 -0500 (EST) From: "Sanford.Rose.Associates." To: walkerrb@www.hendrix.edu Subject: SS7 Help? Dear Babu, I am an executive search consultant and I'm writing to see if you might be willing to help me with a search I am working on. I am working in the telecommunications area, and have reviewed your post in the comp.dcom newsgroups. I hope you will deem it appropriate that I wrote to you personally. I don't want to corrupt the integrity of the group's discussion with a post, but I would genuinely like a chance to speak with you. That said, some background about the opportunities I'm working with. My client is a rapidly growing company that designs, manufactures and supports a family of high performance, open, programmable digital switching systems used in a wide variety of applications for the telecommunications industry. As you know, the telecommunications industry is in the middle of the most explosive growth in its history and this pre-IPO private company is at the leading edge of this growth. This company is considered to be the clear technology leader in its niche, and it has doubled its revenue every year for the last three years. They have also gone from 100 to over 200 employees in the last year alone, so the potential for rapid advancement is excellent. Their facilities are located in a non-urban, high quality of life location near Cape Cod, in Massachusetts. Their compensation is very competitive, they are paying signing bonuses and offer full relocation for the right candidates. There are several positions I am focused on: 1 - An experienced Senior Software Engineer to join a team working to implement SS7. 2 - An experienced Senior Software Engineer to join a team working to implement SNMP. 3 - A Principal Software Engineer who is both strong technically and has experience in project management. Our candidate must come from the telecommunications industry, and have experience with switching platforms or other similar deployment. Technically, our client would like to see experience in developing real time, embedded software in C/C++, and object oriented programming skills. I believe these are compelling opportunities with a great company, and I would very much appreciate your assistance in identifying any professionals who may be qualified to fill them. I would love to spend a few minutes on the phone with you if you have any thoughts. My phone number is 603-643-4101. Thank you very much for your help, and best regards. Tim McKegney SANFORD ROSE ASSOCIATES/HANOVER Voice: 603-643-4101 Fax: 603-643-4272 Internet: mckegney.sanford.rose@valley.net ============================== [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Babu, my first question would be I wonder how many other people received the same identical letter. He certainly would have been welcome to discuss it with the group at large. If anyone has any suggestions for Mr. McKegney, and/or considers themselves qualified for the positions he is offering, please feel free to contact him directly. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pcdbeta@usr.com (US Robotics Access Corp.) Subject: Looking For PBX Beta Testers Date: 18 Nov 1996 23:35:37 GMT Organization: U.S. Robotics Access Corp. We have recently announced a new ConferenceLink full duplex speakerphone that is designed to work specifically with PBX systems. We are looking for potential beta testers for the ConferenceLink CS1070-1 which works with the following ROLM products: PHONE SYSTEMS Siemens ROLM Series 8000 (8003 and greater) Siemens ROLM Series 9000/9751 Siemens ROLM Series 9006 DESKTOP PHONES 120 400 240 612 312 624 We are looking for PBX system / phone users throughout the country. If you use a ROLM PBX system and are interested in potentially testing new product, please fill out the questionnaire below, to the best of your knowledge, for our records. Once complete, email the questionnaire to the following address: pcdbeta@usr.com with a subject of ROLM PBX Systems. If there are upcoming products that suit your system type and experience, you will be considered in the beta program for that product. Please remember that beta testers are limited for each project, and that applicants and/or potential beta test candidates are not contacted unless they are chosen to participate. Thank you, and we look forward to hearing from you. Best Regards, Applications Engineering U.S. Robotics Access Corp. Personal Communications Division -------------------------------- * Personal Information * Name : Email address : Daytime phone : Fax number : Job Title : Company Name : Shipping Address : (No PO Boxes) * Telephone Environment * PBX System : PBX Manufacturer : PBX Desktop Phone : - Model : * Additional Info * Describe your experience with using/working with digital PBX systems: List other background experience regarding telecommunications: Why do you think you would make a good beta tester: Best Regards, Applications Engineering U.S. Robotics Access Corp. Personal Communications Division ------------------------------ From: James Hinkle Subject: Interconnection Arbitrations Date: Mon, 18 Nov 96 15:08:00 AST I am doing a little research for my employer and was wondering if I could ask for your assistance? The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is intended to allow entities other than those previously designated by state commissions into local markets for markets which contain greater than approximately 3 million access lines (2 percent of the national total). In markets with less than approximately 3 million access lines, Congress allowed the states to determine the degree to which local exchange competition is in the public interest and the timing of local competitive entry. Now what I am trying to find is how many companies under the 2% limit have required Interconnection Arbitrations in Process or contracts approved? Thank you for your assistance. JE Hinkle Regulatory Assistant ATU Telecommunucations email: jhinkle@atu.com ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Net Congestion Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 16:04:00 PST Organization: Shadownet tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) writes: > (I'm wondering what they mean by "peak times" in the article below, > since the net is international. Are they talking about charging > variable rates based upon your local time? Nope. They are talking about charging extra at the *actual* times of peak usage, whatever those may be. Sort of like some freeway on-ramps where when the freeway gets crowded enough they activate a traffic light that only lets folks on as there's room. If the traffic level is high enough, you'd get a prompt (from your ISP?) giving you a choice between hanging up or paying extra. You'd probably also get a similar prompt if you were already online and things got really congested. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > Mail delivery takes absolutely *forever*; there are people getting > the Digest as long as a day or two days after it is issued here. News isn't all that hot. I only got a couple of Digests worth of messages from late *October* here. I don't even worry anymore when I see references to articles I haven't seen. It can take *weeks* for them to appear. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is a shame, and you are not the only person to mention that complaint to me. One thing I have been recommending for several months now is the use of the telecom web page as a way to see news a lot faster than it may reach your site via the Usenet news method. Check out these URLs: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives (our archives) http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/TELECOM_Digest_Online This latter URL (TELECOM_Digest_Online) has all the messages from each issue of the Digest as soon as the issue is released. You do not have to wait for the mail; you do not have to wait for news to arrive at your site. Generally there is about a month's worth (700 or more) of messages which is more than most sites keep available in news. You can read them sorted by date, by author, by subject or by thread. Hyperlinks are present throughout, allowing quick and easy access to other references named, mail, etc. You can even follow up with a reply of your own to the group from there on the web page. A number of readers still prefer Usenet news which is okay with me, but more and more of the former Usenet readers are now using the web page instead. See what you think of it. The other URL mentioned above simply gets you into the Telecom Archives with a couple dozen hyperlinks to other telecom-related pages operated by our readers, etc. Future enhancements for the Telecom web site include installing an IRC-like 'chat' area where telecom readers can meet and consult with each other interactively via the web page. I need some help with this however; my gracious hosts at MIT are understandably reluctant to allow scripts of the sort I propose in their cgi-bin directory. I'd also like to include a 'query' or 'search' script to allow going through all the back issues of the Digest but again, if I had write- permission in cgi-bin I would not simply tell you about it, I would do it. The trouble is, I don't. :( PAT] ------------------------------ From: sal vaclav Subject: Documentation Needed For Stromberg Carlson E120 Date: 20 Nov 1996 22:29:08 GMT Organization: dsi Hey old timers and ex- Stromberg Carlson hands, I am looking for a documentation for Stromberg Calson E120. A small (120 lines) PBX manufactured by (surprise) Stromberg Carlson company in mid seventies and then located in Rochester NY. (Where are they now and what is their name(s) ?) What I really want was called "bubble and flow charts". It was a piece of documentation (engineering document) and was used to design and troubleshoot the system to the component level. Like to have it to show the new generation how to design telephone system and MAKE IT WORK without reinventing "stuff" and in the process tripping over your own feet. I guess some of these were today's politically correct "state diagrams". This system was designed by two fine non-English speaking engineers and one of them was later a president of a small company (upstate NY?) which designed a small CO/PBX system. I heard some of them were sold in Alaska, but that is a rumor. I think the name of the system had a M in it. Any help? Vaclav ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #628 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 22 09:56:09 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA23483; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:56:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:56:09 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611221456.JAA23483@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #629 TELECOM Digest Fri, 22 Nov 96 09:56:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 629 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Guam/CNMI, PR/US Virgin Islands (Mark J. Cuccia) PacBell High Speed Communications Package (Mike King) Re: Ameritech Question (Tad Cook) Transport Layer Timeouts Affecting App Performance (Robert R. Beliveau) New Dial-a-Porn Country Sighted (Leonard Erickson) Free E-Mail (Myron G. Stern) 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'. NOTE: Names and email addresses printed in this Digest are not to be used for unsolicited email purposes under any circumstances! 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 18:45:32 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Guam/CNMI, PR/US Virgin Islands I've recently had some posts about Guam, as they are to be 'joining in' with the rest of the NANP; also there's a *lot* of recent activity regarding the NANP Caribbean's area codes, rates, PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call, fraud, etc. If I hadn't already mentioned, the entire island of Guam is a *single 'monthly flat-rate' local calling/dialing area*. I am not sure about 'local calls billed collect/third-party/card' (such as if from a payphone and 'out-of-change'), if they are presently dialed as 0+seven-digits or 0+671+seven-digits. CNMI, otoh, *does have 'intra-CNMI' toll calls*, dialed presently as 1/0+seven-digits, if not already dialed as 1/0+670+seven-digits. The US Virgin Islands is yet *another* part of the NANP which is a *single 'monthly flat-rate' local calling/dialing area*. Similar to Guam, other than local calls billed collect/third-party/card, such as from payphones when one is out-of-change, there are (presently) no intra-USVI toll calls dialed as 1/0+809+seven-digits (or eventually 1/0+340+seven-digits). From my correspondence with VITELCO (US Virgin Islands Telephone Company), I've been told that: - There *are* COCOTs (privately owned payphones) in that region. - Calls from the USVI to the British Virgin Islands, *even for a total distance between wirecenters/ratecenters of roughly five to ten miles* are billed as *international*, and depending on whether one is on a discount plan, such a call can cost *more* than a (domestic-rated) call from the USVI to Seattle WA! BTW, US Virgin Islands has had 'DDD' to the British Virgin Islands since the early 1970's. I remember seeing a USVI local directory, printed at that time, indicating that one would dial '1+49+ the local five digit number' of a Tortola (BVI) number. Note that 809-49X has been used for most of the prefixes for most of the British Virgin Islands for *years*. At that time, *customers* in the (continental) US could dial direct to *only* to Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, but not to any 'British' parts of the NANP (+1-809) Caribbean nor the (GTE-Codetel) Dominican Republic. Puerto Rico identified its local telephone telephone numbers in a seven-digit format, 7NX-XXXX (except 77X) or 8NX-XXXX. The US Virgin Islands might have still been identifying its local numbers as five digits (N-XXXX), but with the '77' inward access code to be dialed in front of the five-digit local number, thus making up a seven-digit customer dialable number, 77N-XXXX. Back during the 1970's, many of the non-US Caribbean had been intra-island-toll dialable for some years, some (such as within the Bahamas for intra or inter-island but intra-Bahamas toll calls), using a two, three or four digit 'access' code plus the (respectively) five, four or three digit 'local' number (thus making up a seven-digit number, NNX-XXXX), while local calls were dialed simply by their three, four or five digit 'local number. 'Inward' access code + 'local number' ------------------------------------- two-digits five-digits three-digits four-digits four-digits three-digits Other islands (Jamaica, Dominican Republic, Trinidad & Tobago, and 'at that time' the Contel-owned "Grand Bahama Island Telco" for the towns of Freeport and Lucaya) had been identifying their local numbers in *full seven-digit* NNX-XXXX format back in the '70's, even though we couldn't direct dial them from the US yet. Beginning in the early 1970's, customers in the US could also directly dial to the Bahamas. By the mid-1970's, we could directly dial to Bermuda. In the latter half of the 1970's, the UK (and maybe Canada?) could directly dial to virtually *all* of the "British" NANP Caribbean. The (continental) US could began to dial direct to those "British" NANP Caribbean points (as well as to GTE's Codetel in the Dominican Republic) circa 1980. Canada and the UK could directly dial to Grenada *long* before the US could. I have a late 1970's ISD (International Subscriber Dialing) instruction booklet from the British Post Office's Telecom explaining dialing instructions to Grenada. I know that Canadian telephone directories showed Grenada as customer dialable in the early 1980's. It wasn't until around 1987 when the US could *directly dial* to Grenada. (*Obviously* international politics/war/etc. was involved). Local/TSPS *Operators* could directly dial to (most) of the NANP Caribbean back in the 1970's, using special 1XX+ operator/network routing codes. At that time, attempts by *customers* to dial those non-customer-dial locations by using 1/0+809+NNX-XXXX would result in a 'vacant' or 'intercept' recording in either their own local area's toll switch, or from an international gateway switch in White Plains (NY) or Jacksonville (FL), instructing them to place the call through their local operator. Further from my contacts with VITELCO: - While I've been told that COCOTs (private payphones) *do* exist in the US Virgin Islands, I'm not sure about their existance in Guam or the CNMI. But regarding Puerto Rico, I was told that at this time, COCOTs do *NOT* (legally) exist. Of course, this *might* change under the "Telecom Act" or FCC order. - The traditional/dominant telco in Puerto Rico is owned by the island government. And there is no real separate regulatory agency over the telco utility in Puerto Rico. (Since when does a government properly regulate itself, or an owned subsdidiary?). - Intra-island toll rates in Puerto Rico, as has been traditional for intra-state or intra-province rates, can be *quite high*. There isn't any real competition in Puerto Rico (yet). Calls from Puerto Rico to Seattle WA can cost a *lot* less than (most) intra-PR toll calls do! :( MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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: Mike King Subject: PacBell High Speed Communications Package Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 22:07:58 PST ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 05:43:29 -0800 From: sqlgate@sf-ptg-fw.pactel.com Subject: Easy New High-speed Communications Package May Make Daily Commute Go the Way of the Dinosaur FOR MORE INFORMATION: Scott E. Smith, Pacific Bell (415) 394-3624 sesmith@legal.pactel.com Jennifer Wade, 3Com (408) 764-5137 Jennifer_Wade@3Com.com Mike Alva, Lucent Technologies (510) 815-8128 malva@lucent.com Peter Polishuk, Nortel (919) 992-4295 peter_polishuk@nortel.com Easy New High-speed Communications Package May Make Daily Commute Go the Way of the Dinosaur Pacific Bell unveils first complete ISDN and Internet access package for home and business LAS VEGAS -- Good news: for many the daily commute may go the way of the dinosaur thanks to Pacific Bell Home Pack, the nation's first fully integrated ISDN service and Internet access package. Unveiled at this week's Comdex/Fall '96 industry exposition, Pacific Bell Home Pack includes everything users need to bring ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network), to their homes for telecommuting or surfing the Net, including Pacific Bell's FASTRAK SM ISDN service, 3Com Corporation's 3ComImpact IQ ISDN external digital modem, Internet access through Pacific Bell Internet Service's network along with customized Internet software from Netscape Communications Corporation. The package also includes a CD-ROM and video to help users with their Home Pack installation and a $50 rebate coupon from Nortel or Lucent Technologies, who provide ISDN switching technology used by Pacific Bell. ISDN is a high-speed digital communications service that gives a single phone line the ability to transport voice and data communications simultaneously at an affordable cost. It operates at speeds nearly five times faster than today's fastest analog modems, power which makes whole new breeds of applications possible--from interactive publishing and accessing corporate computer networks to telecommuting, videoconferencing and faster, higher performance access to the Internet. 100,000 ISDN Lines Already In Use Recently, Pacific Bell installed its 100,000th ISDN line, making it among the most aggressive ISDN providers in the country. "For everyone who wanted ISDN but thought it was too complicated, Home Pack is the affordable solution," said Pacific Bell President Dave Dorman. "Pacific Bell is the first in the country to offer a complete ISDN service product to its customers. But even more important, we've found a way to make so simple that anyone can hook it up. "We've been able to provide this solution by successfully combining our expertise with Pacific Bell Internet Services, 3Com, Nortel and Lucent Technologies. "Home Pack is the first widely available, one-stop solution for high-speed ISDN service, Internet access and work at home," said Tom Bayless, Pacific Bell director of switched digital services. "Instead of having to do the legwork of tracking down the right ISDN hardware, calling network and Internet providers, and crossing their fingers that the setup will be compatible, all Pacific Bell customers have to do is call 1 800 4PB-ISDN to order everything they need--ISDN lines, Internet access, hardware, software and installation software that interworks with Pacific Bell's central office switch to automatically configure the system. It's so easy that once ISDN service has been installed Home Pack users will be up and running in less than 15 minutes. With Pacific Bell ISDN, users have a guaranteed bandwidth of 128 Kilobits per second--which is five times faster than the fastest analog modems--plus all the security of a direct line. Home Pack Automatically Configures Itself Pacific Bell selected the 3ComImpact IQ ISDN modem because it is easy to install and provides reliable standards-based connectivity. Home Pack's 3Com Impact IQ ISDN modem is equipped with several intelligent capabilities. In fact, the product is so smart it configures itself automatically during installation, eliminating several difficult steps for the user. And, it is the only product that offers advanced security, ensuring that user communication is always private. It also offers features that make it both fast and user-friendly, including SPID Wizard, Automatic Switch Detect and Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation. SPID Wizard and Automatic Switch Detect work together during installation to determine the ISDN line parameters, configure the device and place a test call--eliminating several difficult steps for the user. With a fast ISDN connection the 3ComImpact IQ ISDN modem can handle incoming and outgoing calls simultaneously from either a telephone, fax machine or an analog modem. The modem does this by automatically reducing an ongoing high-speed data session to a single channel when the phone, fax or modem either rings or is initiated by the user. At the end of the call, the ISDN connection is re-established to its highest speed. "High performance shouldn't mean high maintenance," said Reginald Best, vice president and general manager of 3Com's Remote Access Products Operations. "We designed 3ComImpact IQ to be so simple and reliable for the user that once it's installed users never have to worry about it. Home Pack includes the 3ComImpact IQ modem for $329 after Nortel's or Lucent Technologies' $50 rebate, and installation charges for FASTRAK ISDN of $125 and Pacific Bell Internet access of $49.95. Monthly and usage charges for ISDN and Internet access are additional. "This is a terrific value! For about $500 you get a complete solution that would cost much more if you tried to do it all yourself with competitive equipment and services," said Dan Estabrook, ISDN product manager for Pacific Bell. "This is a tremendous value when you consider ISDN handles whole range of both voice and data applications. But maybe the best part of the value is that it's easy--no aggravation." Pacific Bell Network Integration, a subsidiary of Pacific Bell, is responsible for integrating the elements of Home Pack into a single package, and managing delivery of the hardware and software components. Pacific Bell is a subsidiary of Pacific Telesis Group, a diversified telecommunications corporation based in San Francisco. More information on Pacific Bell's Home Pack and other products and services can be found on the company's home page: http://www.pacbell.com/. ----------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Ameritech Question Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 12:45:07 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) eric@fudge.uchicago.edu (Eric Fischer) wrote: > I received a postcard in the mail from Ameritech a few days ago with a > list of the exchanges being moved to 773. It's rather long, or I'd > type it in here. Anyway, I assume other Ameritech customers will also > be getting these in the near future (if Chicago's postal service can > be trusted). Here is a list of all prefixes in 312, 773 and 708. I got this from the NPA for Windows program, a great shareware product that is now updated several times per year at http://www.pcconsultant.com/~robert/pcc. The author's email address is robert@pcconsultant.com. This is from the 15 Oct 96 version. It can also identify locations, zip codes and central office latitude and longitude from an NPA and prefix, as well as calculate mileage between COs serving any two phone numbers. Since it can also generate lat/lon coordinates for each prefix, it is also possible to generate lists automatically and then sort them according to geography. With this you can make a dandy map showing the exact locations of central offices and figure out the boundary between area codes. The only thing that it won't tell you is the precise boundary between serving offices. The L after a prefix means Landline, W=Wireless. NPA City NXX IL Illinois 312 Chicago-C 201L 203W 204L 206W 207L 208W 213W 214L 216W 218W 220L 222L 223L 225L 226L 228L 230L 232W 234L 236L 240L 243L 245L 249W 250W 251L 253L 255L 258L 259W 263L 266L 269L 272W 280L 289W 290W 293L 294L 299W 300L 302W 306L 307W 308L 309L 313W 315W 316W 320W 321L 322L 323W 326L 328L 329L 330W 332L 333W 335L 336L 337L 339W 341L 343W 345L 346L 347L 349W 350W 351W 353L 355L 357L 358W 359W 360L 361W 362L 364L 365W 368L 369W 370W 372L 377L 382L 383W 387W 388L 389W 390W 391W 392L 393W 394L 396W 397L 398W 400W 401W 402W 405W 407L 408L 409L 410L 413L 415W 416L 417W 418W 419L 421L 422L 424L 425L 426W 427L 428W 431L 432L 433W 435L 437L 438W 439W 440L 441L 443L 444L 448W 449W 450W 452W 453L 454L 455L 456L 457W 458L 459W 460L 461L 464L 466L 467L 470L 474L 475L 480W 482L 484W 485W 490W 491L 494L 495W 496L 497W 498L 499L 502W 503L 504W 505W 507L 512W 513W 514W 515W 516L 519W 520W 526L 527L 530W 532W 537L 540L 541L 547W 550W 551L 552W 553L 554L 556W 557L 558L 559L 562W 563L 564L 565L 566W 567L 570W 571W 572L 573L 574L 575W 576W 578L 580L 587L 590W 592L 595L 596L 597W 598L 599W 600L 603L 605W 606L 607W 608W 609L 610W 612W 613W 614W 616L 617W 618W 620W 621L 623W 627L 628L 629L 630L 633L 634L 635W 636W 639W 640L 641L 642L 644L 645L 647W 648L 649L 652W 653L 654L 655L 657W 658L 659W 661L 663L 664L 666L 669L 670L 672W 674L 676L 677W 679W 680W 682W 683L 687L 688W 689W 690W 692L 695L 696L 697L 701L 703W 704L 705L 706L 707W 709W 710L 712W 713W 715L 716W 718W 719? 720W 724W 726L 727L 732L 733L 738L 739L 740W 742L 744L 746L 747L 748W 750L 751L 754W 755L 756L 757W 758W 759L 760W 765L 766W 770L 771W 781L 782L 786L 787L 789L 790W 791L 793L 796L 797L 798W 799L 801W 802W 803L 805W 806W 807L 808L 810W 812W 813W 814L 817L 818W 819L 820W 822L 823L 824W 827L 828L 829L 830W 831L 832L 833W 834L 835W 836L 837W 839W 840W 841W 842L 845L 848W 849L 850L 851W 852W 853L 855L 856L 857L 859W 860W 861L 867L 875L 876L 877W 879L 882W 885W 886L 887L 891W 896L 897W 898W 899L 901L 902L 903W 904L 905L 906L 908L 909W 910W 912L 913L 914W 915L 917L 919W 920L 922L 923L 930L 931L 932W 934W 936W 937W 938L 939L 940W 941W 942L 943L 944L 945L 946L 948L 949L 951L 952? 954L 957L 963W 965W 967L 970L 972W 974L 977L 979W 981L 982W 983L 984L 985L 986L 987L 988L 993L 996L 997L 998W Hinsdale-C 301W 304W 314W 352W 510W 531W 544W 699W 749W 816W 844W 990W La Grange-C 295W 318W 366W 367W 403W 501W 517W 717W 968W 969W Wheeling-C 215W 246W 303W 317W 331W 354W 406W 412W 518W 524W 615W 865W 991W NPA City NXX IL Illinois 773 Chicago-C 202L 205L 221L 224L 227L 229L 233L 235L 237L 238L 239L 241L 244L 247L 248L 252L 254L 256L 257L 260L 261L 262L 264L 265L 267L 268L 271L 274L 275L 276L 277L 278L 279L 281L 282L 283L 284L 285L 286L 287L 288L 291L 292L 296L 298L 324L 325L 327L 334L 338L 342L 348L 356L 361W 363L 371L 373L 374L 375L 376L 378L 379L 381L 384L 385L 388L 395L 404L 429L 434L 436L 445L 451L 462L 463L 465L 468L 471L 472L 473W 476L 477L 478L 479W 481L 483L 486L 487L 488L 489L 493L 506L 508L 509L 521L 522L 523L 525L 528L 533L 534L 535L 536L 538L 539L 542L 545L 546W 548L 549L 560W 561L 568L 579L 581L 582L 583L 584L 585L 588L 594L 601L 602L 604L 622L 624L 626L 631L 637L 638L 643L 646L 650L 651L 660L 665L 667L 681L 684L 685L 686L 695L 702L 721L 722L 723L 725L 728L 730W 731L 734L 735L 736L 737L 743L 745L 752L 753L 761L 762L 763L 764L 767L 768L 769L 772L 774L 775L 776L 777L 778L 779L 783L 784L 785L 792L 794L 804L 821L 826L 838L 843L 846L 847L 854L 862L 863L 866L 868L 871L 873L 874L 878L 880L 881L 883L 884W 889L 890L 892L 894L 907L 918L 921L 924L 925L 926L 927L 928L 929L 933L 935L 947L 955L 961W 962L 973L 975L 978L 989L 992L 994L 995L Park Ridge-C 380L 399L 693L 714L 864L NPA City NXX IL Illinois 708 Aurora-C 264L 585L 801L 820L 844L 851L 859L 892L 896L 897L 898L 906L 907L 978L Bartlett-C 213L 289L 372L 483L 736L 830L 837L Blue Island-C 239L 371L 385L 388L 389L 396L 489L 535L 597L 687L Chicago Heights-C 283L 481L 503L 709L 720L 747L 748L 754L 755L 756L 757L 758L Cicero-C 222L 442L 447L 484L 652L 656L 749L 780L 788L 795L 863L Downers Grove-C 241L 271L 275L 282L 322W 434L 512L 515L 663L 719L 743L 769L 810L 829L 852L 874L 910L 960L 963L 964L 968L 969L 971L 985L Elmhurst-C 200 279L 415L 530L 600L 617L 782L 832L 833L 834L 941L 993L Geneva-C 208L 232L 262L 377L 406L 443L 444L 513L 584L 761L 840L 845L 879L Glen Ellyn-C 469L 545L 790L 858L 942L Harvey-C 210L 225L 331L 333L 339L 596L 877L 915L Hinsdale-C 203L 207W 214W 218L 230L 321L 323L 325L 368L 408W 472L 528W 571L 572L 573L 574L 575L 586L 601W 642W 654L 655L 684W 703W 716L 722W 789L 794W 819W 822W 850L 856L 887L 908W 912W 919L 920L 954L 986L 990L Homewood-C 206L 798L 799L 922L 957L Itasca-C 238L 250L 274L 285L 350L 477L 595L 616L 766L 773L 775L 860L 875L La Grange-C 242W 246L 276W 313W 319W 341W 348W 352L 354L 379W 387L 399W 440W 476W 482L 485L 504W 514W 567W 579L 626W 638W 643W 659W 661W 694W 710W 738W 750W 760W 784L 812W 846W 861W 878W 886W 901W 927W 936W 962W 984W 988W 994W Lansing-C 418L 474L 730L 862L 868L 891L 895L Lemont-C 226L 243L 252L 257L 378L 739L 759L 783L 972L Lombard-C 261L 268L 495L 543L 613L 620L 627L 628L 629L 691L 792L 889L 916L 932L 953L Maywood-C 216L 236L 327L 338L 343L 344L 345L 401L 409L 410L 412W 414L 449L 450L 493L 531L 544L 547L 562L 649L 681L 786L 865L 947L Naperville-C 224L 245L 300L 305L 355L 357L 369L 416L 420L 505L 527L 589L 637L 713L 717L 778L 904L 930L 955L 961L 979L 983L Oak Lawn-C 229L 233L 346L 422L 423L 424L 425L 430L 499W 598L 599L 636L 857L Oak Park-C 209L 366L 383L 386L 445L 488L 524L 660L 763L 771L 848L Orland Hills-C 301L 349L 403L 460L 873L River Grove-C 324W 452L 453L 456L 583L 999W Roselle-C 217W 220W 237L 254W 278W 284W 287W 306W 314W 337W 363W 380W 431W 494W 507W 525W 542W 558W 565W 602W 603W 609W 610W 612W 624W 641W 702W 744W 764W 804W 807W 814W 905L 917W 997W Schaumburg-C 347W 373W 436W 471W 648W 751W 767W 826W 899W 977W 987W Summit-C 269W 458L 496L 563L 594L 728L 839L 929L Tinley Park-C 429L 532L 560L 614L 633L 802L Wheaton-C 221L 260L 315L 407L 462L 510L 653L 665L 668L 682L 690L 752L 871L Tad Cook | tad@ssc.com | KT7H | Seattle | "You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New York and his head meows in Los Angeles. Do you understand this? Radio operates exactly the same way; you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat." --- Albert Einstein. ------------------------------ From: Robert R. Beliveau Subject: Transport Layer Timeouts Affecting App Performance Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 19:40:44 -0800 Organization: Network General Corp. I am hoping someone can clear up a nagging issue for me. I have heard from multiple sources that if lower OSIRM layer entities corrupt, drop or somehow fail to deliver a PDU to the transport layer (layer 4) that serious performance degredation can result. I have heard some people say timeouts can be twenty seconds depending on the protocol. I have also heard something like dropping one percent of the packets **can** result in something like a 90% performance hit to the application, depending on transport layer retransmission timers. When I look at TCP and SPX, I observe much shorter timeouts and retransmissions, and performance is not hit as drastically as noted above. Maybe those statements only apply if a higher layer protocol expects to be using the services of the reliable, connection oriented, LLC Type1 or Type2, (I forget which is which) but actually end up using the datagram LLC (unreliable) type? Do people often see these things cause huge performance hits? What are the worst protocols? Can anybody provide me with specific scenarios where these problems cause really serious app performance degredation? I think of the way older Sun OS's use UDP for NFS, (with a stop and wait ARQ method for providing reliability) but now they use TCP with the sliding window, and performance, especially over high latency and highly errored links, is much better. This is the only example I can come up with. Perhaps they mean that if the transport layer does not provide reliable conection to the higher layers who expect a reliable connection, then the problems occur to this extent? Does anybody suffer from the same confusion? advance, Bob Beliveau ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: New Dial-a-Porn Country Sighted Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 03:35:23 PST Organization: Shadownet I just noticed a graphics file go by that had the following phone number on it: 011-995-xxx-yyy Looks like Georgia (the country, not the state!) is into the dial-a-porn biz. And I have to wonder if this was *planned* by someone. After all they can actually play a recording at the start of the call: "This is a call to Georgia. It could be quite expensive. Please hang up now if you are not willing to pay the charges ..." And how many folks are going to realize *which* Georgia is meant? Especially if the recording has a Southern accent. Pure speculation, but you *really* have to wonder. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ Subject: Free E-Mail From: mgstern@juno.com (Myron G. Stern) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 06:46:01 EST Mornin' Pat, Your recent posting of the FreeMark mail service prompts me to say that Juno has been on line with this concept for quite a while. I and many members of my family have been using them for several months. A very unobtrusive commercial ad may appear as a streaming banner across the top of the screen from time to time, but it does NOT interfere with the ease of reading or preparing your mail. Very intuitive (user cuddly, not just friendly) software and also has a spell check routine. Thought you might like to know. Mike Stern ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #629 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 22 10:43:07 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA27683; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 10:43:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 10:43:07 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611221543.KAA27683@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #630 TELECOM Digest Fri, 22 Nov 96 10:43:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 630 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Unauthorized Use of Names in This Digest (TELECOM Digest Editor) It's Splits For Massachusetts (John Cropper) HFC and ADSL Article Summaries and Diagrams on my WWW Site (Robin Whittle) Key Escrow - Which Key Would be Taken by Court Order? (Keith Bostic) AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Number) (Z Rubenstein) It's Official: SAIC Acquires Bellcore (John R. Levine) Documents Wanted on Ring Cadance (jeffscman@aol.com) Re: Catching An Annoying Caller (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'. NOTE: Names and email addresses herein are intended for use by readers to facilitate correspondence on the topics discussed in this issue and are NOT intended for unsolicited email purposes. Collection of names and email addresses from this list is specifically forbidden. 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 22 Nov 1996 10:09:24 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Unauthorized Use of Names in This Digest I have received several notes in the past two or three days from people saying their email address was obtained from this Digest and used for the purpose of unsolicited junk email purposes. I am asking at this time in a nice way that the persons doing this cease and desist in this practice immediatly. This is your nice, polite warning. I have contacted an attorney who will assist me in filing suit against persons and companies which persist in this practice. Please stop immediatly. The *only purpose* of email addresses printed in this Digest is to facilitate correspondence between readers on the subject matter of the message in question. It is not printed here to be used by head- hunters looking to fill employment positions, nor for other unsolicited email purposes. Again, I strongly request that you stop now. Patrick Townson TELECOM Digest Editor ------------------------------ From: psyber@mindspring.com Subject: It's Splits For Massachusetts Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:55:23 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com From the Massachusetts PSC: HARSHBARGER DECIDES TO SPLIT NEW PHONE AREA CODES Wednesday, October 23, 1996 Attorney General Scott Harshbarger backs carving two new area codes out of the existing 617 and 508 codes, a move that would require more than one million residents in eastern Massachusetts to change their phone numbers. Representing consumers in hearings before the state Department of Public Utilities on how to keep up with the public's insatiable appetite for new phone numbers, Harshbarger basically went with the same approach used eight years ago when 508 was carved out of 617. ``The geographic split solution is the most widely accepted method for implementing new area codes in the United States, and every state public utilities commission, including the Massachusetts DPU, has succesfully implemented it in the past,'' Harshbarger said in a statement. Rejected was an approach favored by Nynex Corp. and cellular phone firms that would overlay the two new area codes over the existing ones. Overlays would allow current customers to keep their phone numbers while new area codes would be given to new customers. Harshbarger's aides said the Nynex plan was inconvenient and could confuse customers. It would force everyone to dial at least 10 digits for even local phone calls and could result in customers on the same street or even in the same house having different area codes. Assistant Attorney General Daniel Mitchell said another concern was Nynex's control of nearly two-thirds of the existing numbers in the 617 and 508 areas. Mitchell said Nynex could gain a competitive advantage through its control of the numbers, since many businesses perceive them as having additional value. ``That competitive advantage is mitigated if you split the area codes,'' Mitchell said. Thomas DeSisto, managing director for state regulatory planning at Nynex, said he was dismayed at the attorney general's decision. DeSisto said the notion of everyone dialing 10 digits for every call is not a big hurdle, since more and more people are dialing 10 digits now and will in the future as area codes become smaller. DeSisto also minimized the confusion of having different area codes in the same neighborhood, saying many neighbors now have different exchanges. An exchange is the first three numbers of the seven-digit phone listing. Businesses, represented primarily by chambers of commerce, have backed the overlay approach, primarily because it would allow them to avoid a number change that could require buying new stationery and business cards, repainting company vehicles and redoing advertising. Cellular firms also support overlays in part because a geographical split would require them to spend millions of dollars reprogramming customers' phones. While the exact outlines of the new 978 and 781 area codes have not been agreed upon, there is general agreement that 781 would encompass an area just north and west of Boston, including Arlington, Malden, Revere and Wellesley. The 978 code would encompass communities in the northern half of the 508 area code, including Andover, Concord, Danvers, Fitchburg, Gloucester, Lawrence, Lowell and Salem. In several communities, including Newton, Watertown, Somerville, Charlestown and Framingham, there would actually be two area codes. Public concern over how the lines are drawn is expected to intensify as the DPU nears a final decision on the matter later this year or early next year. John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ From: firstpr@ozemail.com.au (Robin Whittle) Subject: HFC and ADSL Article Summaries and Diagrams on my WWW Site Date: 22 Nov 1996 13:42:56 GMT Organization: First Principles This is a notice to announce my WWW site listing of articles I have written for Australian Communications magazine: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~firstpr/bband * Descriptions and key points of the articles I have written. * Extract from the August 96 article - regarding the difficulties of billing cable modem Internet usage. * Two diagrams depicting the modulation schemes used in HFC telephony: ADC's OFDM and Motorola's DQPSK - with a comparison of the differing symbol lengths. * Links to various resources, including the Australian HFC operators Telstra and Optus Vision. The articles are only available in the magazine, and there are subscription prices and contact details for Australian Communications (auscom@ozemail.com.au) -- who can supply back issues. The articles are: * Telstra's HFC Internet service (Nov 96 - 2 pages) Hybrid Networks cable modems for Australia's first HFC cable Internet service. The service is only available in certain suburbs of Melbourne but a new service for Melbourne and Sydney generally is planned for early 1997. * The Optus Vision HFC System - Telephony Now and Data on the Way (Aug 96 14 pages, 3 diagram, one table) Description of the telephony and cable modem products of ADC / NetComm and Motorola. Detailed discussion of the difficulties faced by HFC operators in maintaining reliable service in the face of ingress noise into the upstream path. Diagram depicting the fibre, node and hardline coax, with the internals of the nodes and amplifiers shown. Also shows internals of the home access unit, with switched CATV port, filters, modulator and demodulator and drivers for POTS, BR-ISDN and computer interfaces. * Telstra's New Model Network: the FMO and broadband full-service- network technologies (Apr 96 11 pages, 4 diagrams, one photo) Telstra's Future Mode of Operation - the massive overhaul of its switched telephony network from 5000 exchanges of >14 different types, to a two level, ISDN capable network with 200 exchanges (of only two types: AXE and S12) to serve all customers in the entire country (plus more for mobiles and some business customers). The second part of the article discusses and critically evaluates prospects for HFC, Fibre to the Curb (FTTC) and Fibre to the Home (FTTH) technologies for creating a Full Services Network. * The Great Cable Race (Dec 95 / Jan 96 12 pages, 3 figures, 6 photos) Technical fundamentals of Hybrid Fibre Coaxial cable systems, with specific details of Telstra's and Optus Vision's approaches. Detailed diagram depicting how the Optus Vision HFC exchange would handle the upstream and downstream signals for all the various things the system might carry: analogue TV, signals to and from the analogue Set Top Units, digital video signals, signals for Internet cable modems and for ADC's telephony system. Another diagram represents the allocation of upstream and downstream spectrum to the various signals. Methods of expanding an existing HFC system are examined. Total upstream and downstream data capacities are calculated for HFC systems after arriving at estimates of spectral efficiencies in both directions. * ADSL - Bridging the Superhighway Gap? (May & June 1994 16 pages, 6 figures, 2 tables) Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line is a means of getting up to 8 Megabits per second (Mbps) down several kilometres of ordinary twisted pair telephone line, whilst simultaneously receiving up to 0.8 Mbps upstream from the home and supporting a standard analogue phone. This article looks at Telstra's ADSL trial, and in particular at Amati's DMT (Discrete Multi Tone) modulation technique - which has some similarities to OFDM. Detailed description of DMT, with diagrams depicting how the modulation depths of the QAM carriers are adjusted to account for varying signal-to-noise ratios on the twisted pair at different frequencies and over time. Discussion of the noise, attenuation, distortion, echo and phase difficulties inherent in twisted pair lines and such things as bridge taps. Also the massive DSP requirements of ADSL modems and the stringent requirements on the analogue circuitry - especially the Analogue to Digital Converter. A table gives data rates for the various classes of operation in the emerging ANSI ADSL standard. There is a table of educated guesses on distance limits in kilometres for DMT ADSL at various upstream and downstream data rates on various gauges of wire. Robin Whittle http://www.ozemail.com.au/~firstpr firstpr@ozemail.com.au 11 Miller St. Heidelberg Heights 3081 Melbourne Australia Ph +61-3-9459-2889 Fax +61-3-9458-1736 Consumer advocacy in telecommunications, especially privacy First Principles - Research and expression - music, music industry, telecommunications human factors in technology adoption Real World Interfaces - Hardware and software, especially for music ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 16:05:02 EST From: Keith Bostic Subject: Key Escrow - Which Key Would be Taken by Court Order? Reply-To: queens-list@netcom.com Forwarded-by: cyerkes From: Ed Stone Newsgroups: talk.politics.crypto Subject: Key Escrow - which key would be taken by court order? Date: Tuesday, November 19, 1996 3:12 PM A common misconception is that only the keys of bad guys would be handed over to Barney Fife or J. Edgar, or Hillary, or Tony Marceca, or Segretti, or Haldeman or Mitchell, or Liddy, or North, or Livingstone, or whoever. Not so... Cast: Bad Billy - the FBI has probable cause to believe he is planning to blow up a government building or an outhouse or something. He is a child- molesting, bank-robbing, S&L-looting, DNC-contributing, crack-selling, cop-killing scumbag. He is out on parole, of course. Angelic Andy - worst offense is a 1972 parking ticket; not wanted for or suspected of anything by anybody. Bad Billy encrypts a message to Angelic Andy using, of course, Andy's public key. The FBI wants to read that message, and wonders who Andy is fronting for. Whose key does the FBI pull out of the escrow vault? Billy's key will do them no good for this message, they need Angelic Andy's secret key. Sorry Andy, you are not suspected of anything except receiving an encrypted email from Bad Billy. Your key is pulled by court order, or "similar authorization". Bad Billy is bad but not stupid. What is his defense? Simple: grab some email spam list and send everyone with a public key an encrypted message. Sorry, all you unsuspecting, innocent folks with encryption keys, you have ALL just lost your privacy, because the FBI has probable cause to grab your secret key and tap your electronic and other communications. The FBI recently asked for and got a telephony provision (CALEA) to insure that phone companies give the FBI the capacity to tap 1% of all phone calls in large cities, simultaneously. Wonder why? They aren't just going to listen to the Bad Billies, they have to check out the Angelic Andys. Recently, there was some bizarre group in Philadelphia, I think, that was operating a knock-off of an old-style Che Gueverra Communist cell. The police, fortuitously, received an *anonymous* tip that *child abuse* (Waco?) was going on inside, so the police had probable cause to kick and enter. How long will it take the bad cops (who may be bad but are not stupid, either) to figure out that you can get a clean shot at Angelic Andy's key just by getting a dirty informant to send him an encyrpted message? Would have made tapping Martin Luther King a lot easier, huh? Could have a legal wiretap on the 1996 MLK, reading messages in real-time with MLK's secret key, simply by having FBI Informant #777654 send him an encrypted email about pizza delivery services. Just something to think about as you send in your secret keys to whoever Mr. Clinton designates. And one more thing. Do you feel OK with your keys in Mr. Clinton's designee's hands? If you do, great! What about when Newt is president? Still OK? And the Newt fans -- feel OK about President Hillary Clinton succeeding Bill? Will she leave your key on the table in the book closet? Perot? Will he leave it under the hood of that car he wants to fix? Ed Stone estone@remove-this.synernet.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 10:53:05 -0800 From: Zev Rubenstein Subject: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Numbers) CARICKINC@aol.com wrote: > Has anyone ever heard of something called a "500" number available > from ATT? To which our Esteemed Editor gave a very thorough reply. The service is called "True Connections", and for further details, you can visit the AT&T website devoted to it at: http://www.att.com/trueconnections/ The service allows you to change the number to which your calls are forwarded based on a time-of-day schedule, or to have a sequence of up to three numbers to cycle through. In both cases, callers get voice mail if you are not reached. As Pat noted, you can use your own voice mail if you like. You can adjust the number of rings yourself, and override the number list on the fly. Overrides can be set to run for a specific amount of time (after which your sequence is in effect again) or to continue until turned off. I have the service myself, and like it very much. You can also pick a vanity number, if it is an available number in the list of 500-NXX assigned to AT&T (there is no 500 number portability yet). In addition, if you use the voice mail offered by AT&T, you can also get pager notification whenever someone leaves you a message. Again, if this feature is available on your existing voice mail, you can continue to use it there, but it's a nice feature if your personal voice mail doesn't support it. Finally, AT&T has two versions of the service, which act identically. The consumer service is called True Connections, and the business service is called EasyReach. The primary difference is that you will be provisioned with the service that matches the type of phone line you will use to bill the service. So, if you choose a home (consumer) phone number to bill the service to, you will get True Connections. If you put the billing on a business line you will get EasyReach. Full disclosure: My company does consulting work to AT&T at this time, but I ordered the service when it was first announced, which was at a time when we were not doing any work for AT&T. Zev Rubenstein zev@ntr-usa.com Nationwide Telecommunications Resources "The Telecommunications Resource Company" visit our web site at http://www.ntr-usa.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 13:07:55 EST From: John R. Levine Subject: It's Official: SAIC Acquires Bellcore Today's {Wall Street Journal} just reported that SAIC, the sometimes controversial employee-owned defense contractor that also owns the InterNIC, will buy Bellcore from the Baby Bells. This sale had been rumored for quite a while. Sale price estimated to be $700 million, expected to close in about a year after regulators say OK. You probably won't be amazed to hear that Bellcore anticipates that they'll continue to do a lot of business with the seven Bell companies. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Trumansburg NY Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies" and Information Superhighwayman wanna-be ------------------------------ From: jeffscman@aol.com Subject: Documents Wanted on Ring Cadance Date: 22 Nov 1996 14:38:32 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com I am looking for a white paper on the ring cadances for the US and aboroad. If any one can point me in the right direction I would be most grateful. ------------------------------ From: prvtctzn@aol.com (Robert Bulmash) Subject: Re: Catching An Annoying Caller Date: 22 Nov 1996 04:42:02 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think what he referred to as > *57 is what you are referring to as *52. > It will probably have to be obtained via a specific effort by > telco using a trap on the line. Bob Bulmash in the message > before this recommend that course of action also, but something > he neglected to mention was that Ameritech at least -- maybe > other telcos also -- require a signed statement from their customer > authorizing telco to turn the evidence over to the police, *and* > promising to follow up by signing a complaint with the police once > the results of the trap are turned over. Actually, the `signed statement' is asked for *after* a police report is filed. Telcos will not put a trap on a line without a police report (complaint) on file with the cops. > Normally the police will not disclose the results of the trap (and > telco will never do so) without a signed complaint and the > commencement of prosecution. Actually, it goes like this: 1) you get harrassing calls; 2) you file a police report; 3) you call the telco and ask for the trap; 4) the telco asks the cops to confirm the police report number; 5) the telco puts the trap on your line and sends you a document to sign, stating that you will prosecute. (see `Note' below); 6) the telco gets the harrassers number and gives it to the cops; 7a) if the harasser is out of the cops jurisdiction, the cops call the harrasser and tell him to stop it ENDING THE INVESTIGATION; 7b) if the harrasser is in the jurisdiction, the cops will ask you to sign a complaint. Note: At one time, Ameritech didn't charge for traps. Then one day, they asked the Illinois Commerce Commission for permission to charge. One reason they gave the ICC for the need to charge was that too many customers asked for traps, that were successful, but refused to prosecute when it turned out to be a neighbor's kid. Nevertheless, then as now, Ameritech required trap customers to sign a statement declaring they would prosecute. When I asked Ameritech why they used this argument before the ICC rather than forcing customer to prosecute, Ameritech said they had no power to require prosecution (even though they had a signed stateent to that effect from the customer). When I asked Ameritech why they did not charge trap customers some sort of surcharge unless they prosecuted, Ameritech said (essentially) "have a nice day". > Bob also feels the results of the trap can be obtained by filing > suit under FOIA, but I do not think so. 'Ongoing police investigations' > are never available under FOIA for obvious reasons. That's right! But my suggestion was to let the cops finnish their investigation and then file the FOIA request. > The catch-22 is then that telco only will do the trap and release the > results at all if you promise to prosecute. Telco says they are not > going to serve as your private detective agency or skip-tracing service, > etc. You can promise to prosecute, but if you refuse, Ameritech (in practice) will not require you to abide by your promise. Thus, no Catch-22! But so what. The guy getting the hang-up calls SHOULD prosecute, AND sue in civil court. > Now we know statistically that the overwhelming majority of harrassing > calls where the party simply rings your telephone and hangs up without > speaking are made by people *known or related to* the party being harrassed. > A relative, a 'friend', a former/current lover, someone who wants to > know what is going on. Yes, I suppose a certain number of those cases > could come from predictive dialers but those would usually be over a > period of several hours or perhaps several days, but not for months on > end. Wrongo! The women who got $9,600 in settlement was called by a predictive dialer for several months, at least one of those months AFTER Ameritech / the cops contacted the firm and asked them to stop. > So before you order a trap and possibly commit to getting the > police involved, *make certain* you will be happy with the end results > and not possibly getting a relative arrested or former employee, etc. > Ameritech for one simply will not do a trap/trace without the assurance > you will cooperate and not leave them hanging where a possible violation > of the calling party's privacy is concerned. PAT] Pat, The LAST thing Ameritech cares about is our privacy. Bob Bulmash Private Citizen, Inc. http://webmill.com/pci/home http://webmill.com/prvtctzn/home [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The last thing they may care about is our privacy, but they are too smart to allow any one customer to put them in a position where they are left twisting in the breeze or hanging out to dry. I never said they do anything out of the goodness of their heart. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #630 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 22 12:19:02 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA07931; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 12:19:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 12:19:02 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611221719.MAA07931@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #631 TELECOM Digest Fri, 22 Nov 96 12:19:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 631 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization (Kenneth A. Becker) Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory! (mitch@alberts.com) Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory! (Diamond Dave) Re: Documentation Needed For Stromberg Carlson E120 (capsalad@gate.net) Submarine Cables in December *Wired* (Bill Higgins) Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades (Leonard Erickson) Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades (Bill Sohl) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Steve Michelson) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Nils Anderson) Subscribe to ADSL Newsletter (Terry Flanagan) Company Information (Chris Siegle) Searching the Archives (Keith Parr) 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'. NOTE: Email addresses and names herein are intended solely for use by the correspondents named to facilitate correspondence on the topics discussed in this issue. Other use of email addresses is forbidden. 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: kab@hokab.hobl.lucent.com (Kenneth A. Becker) Subject: Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization Date: 21 Nov 1996 13:56:46 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Holmdel, New Jersey Reply-To: kab1@lucent.com Isaac Wingfield wrote: > I'm involved with the IEEE committee which is setting standards for > cable modems (data over cable-TV networks). One type of data to be > carried over these networks is digital telephony. I understand that > there is a need for a precise (loop timed) 8 KHz reference in the > domestic unit. The trick is to decide how to deliver this reference, > and how many are needed. OK. Well, Guess I'll weigh in on this one. Heck, I design synchronizers! Let's start off. In the US, somewhere near Boulder, CO, are banks of cesium clocks run by the National Bureau of Standards. Said clocks are one of the world's master timing references; that is, when you hear about "leap seconds" and such, the timing for the whole business is run by Boulder and other national timing centers. At one time there was a landline timing signal sent from Boulder to a spot in Missouri near the geographic center of the U.S.. From there timing signals were sent to various Stratum 1 nodes (See Bellcore GR-253 and TR-NWT-001244 for definitions) which referred to Missouri; Stratum 2 nodes in major CO's were timed from the Stratum 1 nodes; Stratum 3's in the CO (by far the most common) were timed by the Stratum 2. If there was no Stratum 2 in the CO, timing for the Stratum 3 systems were derived by either dedicated landline clocks or by T1's passed around within DS3 systems. Stratum 4 systems are timed by higher Stratum systems. Two basic points about this: 1) T1's (and E1's) are expected to be fully synchronous across the network. T1's run at 1.544 Mb/s; E1's run at 2.048 Mb/s. Timing is extracted from the data stream itself. T1's contain 24 DS0's, when channelized; E1's contain 30 or so channelized DS0's. Each DS0 is a 64 Kb/s channel that can carry data or voice. 2) One can put T1's (or E1's, with the right gear) through DS3 pipes without removing timing on said T1 or E1. Therefore, a T1 put into a DS3 with a certain clock at point A can be (and is) delivered to point B with the same clock. There is some additional jitter placed on the T1 in the process; however, it is not normally significant. When everything in the network is locked one ends up with two problems: 1) Wander, which is defined as phase changes with frequency contents below 10 Hz. 2) Jitter, which is defined as phase changes above 10 Hz. Bellcore, the ANSI T1.X1 committees, and numerous CCITT (now ITU?) entities have specifications that specify the allowable jitter generation, wander generation, jitter reduction, and tons of other stuff regarding synchronization. A good starting place is GR-253 (SONET timing specifications) and TR-NWT-001244 (Network Synchronization standards). In any case, there are limits to the number of, say, chained Stratum 3 (one Stratum 3 timing another Stratum 3 which times another Stratum 3 and so on) because of the jitter and wander amplification due to noise in the network. Why is this all important? All T1 and E1 receivers contain an elastic store. The input side of the elastic store gets its clock from the received T1 or E1. The output side of the elastic store gets its clock from the system (the equipment the T1/E1 is going into). The nominal length of the elastic store is 250 microseconds, and it is initialized to have a delay of 125 us. Basic idea: one clocks a bit into the receive side. 125 us later, it gets clocked out the transmit side of the store. Now, so long as the phase of the input T1/E1 remains within 125 us of its initial phase everything works fine. If the phase drops down too far (0 us) or too long (250 us) the receiving equipment declares a slip. The delay is reinitialized to 125 us and either garbage data or a repeat of the previous frames data (depending upon the direction of the slip) is transmitted. This means that one 8-bit DS0 sample is going to be wrong when a slip occurs. For voice, this isn't too noticeable. It causes retransmissons of data with error-correcting modems and garbage characters being sent with non-error correcting modems. It can give FAX's the fits, although I know less about how FAX's die this way. If the slips are often enough the T1/E1 will go into Major (CGA) alarm and all data transmission will cease. Now, under normal circumstances the jitter/wander present in the network (all of which comes from various noise sources, by the by) isn't enough to bother a properly engineered network. However, due to hardware failures, errors in maintenance procedures, facility failures, and other neat stuff equipment being timed may lose all timing references. (Note: all synchronization systems following 001244 are >>supposed<< to have two independent timing references to duplicated PLL's; that and $1.00 will get you a cup of coffee.) Sync equipment with no references are supposed to go into Holdover, a state in which the gear tries to stay on the last known good frequency. With Stratum 2 systems, if you're lucky and the reference into the system died cleanly, a max drift in frequency of 1 part in 10e-10 per day is specified. With Stratum 3, you get 255 slips in the first day after loss of reference. With Stratum 4, you go belly up (CGA on all T1's) in pretty short order, as there are no stability specifications. Now, back to the real world. Current technology has dispensed with Missouri. Instead, most CO's that are Stratum 2 have somewhere in them a pretty fancy GPSS receiver. This thing gets its clock from the Global Positioning Satellite System, which in turns gets its clock from Boulder. (Yep, each of those satellites contain a genuine Rubidium clock, sync'd to Boulder). The fancy receiver typically provides timing to a Stratum 2 system which may either be stand-alone (Telecom Solutions) or in a piece of Telco gear (4ESS, for example). As an alternative to the fancy GPSS receiver, some places >>do<< use Cesium clocks; however, to follow 001244, said clocks are not simple and are pretty durn expensive, I believe, to run. Next: Things hooked up to the public switched network (voice calls, POTS, ISDN, and SONET line clocks) >>are<< timed, or are supposed to be. So, if you get an ISDN line from your local 5ESS or what have you, the 64 Kb/s data you get out of that terminal adapter has clock traceable back to NBS. A T1 terminating on a 5E or what have (say, for a company's PBX) likewise has network timing. What >doesn't< have guaranteed timing are T1's that are part of private networks; say, a T1 leased between point A and point B. Unless you ask (and pay) for it, said T1 will be passed through either DS3 or SONET pipes where the timing you put into said pipe is the timing you get out of said pipe. In this case, you're on your own. In any case, to the original poster I say: >>You've<< got some research to do. Pull out your credit card, Call 1-800-521-CORE, and give the nice lady at the other end your order for TR-NWT-0012244. The ANSI T1 committee is doing a good deal of work on timing for SONET; look up their web site and get started. Good luck! Ken Becker DACS Hardware engineering Lucent Technologies ------------------------------ From: mitch@alberts.com Subject: Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory! Date: 21 Nov 1996 22:21:48 GMT Organization: Albert's Ambrey Reply-To: mitch@alberts.com In , psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) writes: > Until recently, my *69 would not return 'out of area calls'. Last > evening, that appears to have changed, at least with calls between > SWBT/PacBell and Bell Atlantic. > I received a call with no voice (probably modem), and the calling > party refused to release the line from an off-hook state. After I > finally terminated the call, (on a whim, just to see if it was one of > the local kids), I hit *69 and to my surprise, the FULL ten-digit NANP > of the calling party (in Houston) was returned to me. > The LECs have finally begun to work together to get the information to > the local level ... now on to cellular! :) I had a similar experience yesterday. What a surprise! A voice reading the telephone number (that called me) to me. The call was from my office to my home, which happens to be over an areacode boundry (215 - 610) but within Bell Atlantic territory. This seems NOT to happen when the call originated from the same areacode. Could it be that they are trying to address the "automagic" return of a toll call with this new feature? I wish they would give the number for ALL calls ... Mitch Rosenberg [mitch@alberts.com] Albert's Ambry The "Try-Before-You-Buy" Internet Software Store [ http://www.alberts.com ] ------------------------------ From: diamond@interserf.net (Diamond Dave) Subject: Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory! Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 14:50:27 GMT Organization: BBS Corner psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) wrote: > Until recently, my *69 would not return 'out of area calls'. Last > evening, that appears to have changed, at least with calls between > SWBT/PacBell and Bell Atlantic. > I received a call with no voice (probably modem), and the calling > party refused to release the line from an off-hook state. After I > finally terminated the call, (on a whim, just to see if it was one of > the local kids), I hit *69 and to my surprise, the FULL ten-digit NANP > of the calling party (in Houston) was returned to me. I think that's partly related to the LD carriers sending the CID info over the LD network. I know that Sprint and MCI are doing this, but I think AT&T is not yet doing it (at least from what I see) > The LECs have finally begun to work together to get the information to > the local level ... now on to cellular! :) I think that has to do with the cellular carriers (especially the non-wireline). Most of them have their own PBX systems and they would have to send the info back over the trunk lines (I know its done all the time, but I think the cell carriers are either reluctant to doing it or think its not worth doing - comments?) Dave Perrussel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 17:44:31 -0500 From: capsalad@gate.net Subject: Re: Documentation Needed For Stromberg Carlson E120 Organization: Nortel DMS-10 Feature Test 1 - Morrisville, NC sal vaclav wrote: > Hey old timers and ex- Stromberg Carlson hands, I am looking for a > documentation for Stromberg Calson E120. A small (120 lines) PBX > manufactured by (surprise) Stromberg Carlson company in mid seventies > and then located in Rochester NY. (Where are they now and what is > their name(s) ?) [stuff deleted] This company was purchased by Siemens AG's Public Switching division (Offentliche Kommunicationsnetze) about six years ago, and is now Siemens Stromberg-Carlson of Boca Raton, FL. Their WWW page (which I wrote ...) is at URL: . You can probably call them at (561) 955-2000, if I remember right. Dave Schulman Validation Engineer, Feature Test I Nortel, Inc. Dept. 3K57 (ESN = 263) 400 Perimeter Park Drive (919) 905-4844 (Voice) Morrisville, NC 27560 (919) 905-2549 (FAX) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 14:21:24 CST From: Bill Higgins Subject: Submarine Cables in December *Wired* *Wired* magazine frequently covers matters relevent to telecommunications, but in the December 1996 (or "*Wired* 4.12" if you're hopelessly wired) issue's cover story they've outdone themselves. A huge chunk of the issue (pages 97 to 160, including some ads though) is devoted to a single article by Neal Stephenson (author of the inventive SF novels *Snowcrash* and *The Diamond Age*), "Mother Earth, Motherboard," about undersea cables. Specifically, Stephenson follows FLAG, "Fiber-optic Link Around the Globe," a cable system stretching from Cornwall to Japan, now under construction. He visits the "landing" sites, switching centers, cable ships, and taverns along the route, and gives a very entertaining account of the undersea-cable business. It's a worthy successor to Arthur C. Clarke's *How the World Was One* (nee *Voices Across the Sea*), an earlier book about submarine telephone and telegraph cables by another distinguished science fiction writer -- a book which Stephenson recommends. The traditional "Get Wired!" message on the cover, rendered in a different language each month, is here translated into the squiggles of a Kelvin siphon recorder. Bill Higgins Internet: HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Bitnet: Sic transit gloria mundi ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 01:04:03 PST Organization: Shadownet Ed Ellers writes: > Given that these switches were designed for a much longer service life > -- forty years is a number I've seen in Bell System literature from > the 1960s, when the 1ESS was introduced -- is it really justifiable > for BellSouth to force ratepayers to pay for new switches so soon? The problem is that the *environment* is changing. For example, the older switches were designed under the assumption that no more than 1 line in 4 (or 8 or 12 or...) would be "in use" at a given time except in extraordinary circumstances. Now, things like data calls and the like are screwing up the traffic patterns that was based on. So the choice is find ways to make people quit doing the "unexpected" things (a tack taken by many LECs) or else upgrade to more modern hardware that can allow *all* the lines to be in use at once. Even with the new gear, it's possible to run out of inter-office trunks, but at least the blockages aren't *inside* the switch. Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: BellSouth's Premature Switch Upgrades Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 12:31:17 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) wrote: > Ed Ellers writes: >> Given that these switches were designed for a much longer service life >> -- forty years is a number I've seen in Bell System literature from >> the 1960s, when the 1ESS was introduced -- is it really justifiable >> for BellSouth to force ratepayers to pay for new switches so soon? But a key aspect is not expected life span, but rather the depreciation lifespan of the capital asset, in this case the switch. > The big win on converting to newer switches has for some years > been real estate. The newer switches are so much smaller that it's > often possible to sell off buildings after upgrading, which generates > revenue that can be taken as immediate profit. > Here in Palo Alto, the oldest big telco building was sold to DEC > a few years ago, and after a few years as offices, it's now being > converted to an "Internet central office", where providers can > co-locate servers. That's an important tradeoff also and colocation will likely become more and more a revenue source for telcos as competion in the local dialtone arena becomes more prevalent. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: Steve Michelson Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 09:56:48 -0500 Organization: AT&T Nils Andersson wrote: > I would propose that the solution be to split the service, one type of > toll-free being totally toll-free to the caller (and the callee may have > to pick up the 35c), another requiring coin same as for a local call to > access the toll-free number (this is the case in many European countries, > toll free requires coin, but is usually unlimited time, whereas local > calls even when local calls are not). > An easy way to do this split without having to do an awful lot of > handshaking would be to use the 800/888/88X splits, and e.g. designate 800 > to be ALWAYS toll free to the caller, and 888 to be coin-required on > payphones. I don't think it would be so easy. Every person/company who has been assigned an 888 number would need to be notified that their 888 number is not toll-free from pay phones, and since there are no more 800 numbers available for assignment, there's no way they can get a phone number that is toll free from pay phones. The intention of the 800/888/8XX split was to have all of those types of numbers act identically so it really wouldn't make sense to treat them differently. Steve Michelson ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: 21 Nov 1996 19:03:55 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , mreiney@hevanet.com writes: > In general, deregulation leads to splitting services, more people to > feed in more food chains, loss of economies of scale and higher total > overhead costs. I'll grant that competition also leads to more > features (extra cost) too. I wonder what breakfast cereal would cost > if the cost of competition (mostly advertising) was zero. Ditto for > automobiles, beer ... the list is endless. Nice theory (I am NOT being sarcastic). The only problem is human nature being what it is, it tends to fail on "who decides" and other devils-in-the-details. Once upon a time, this was given a huge field test known as the Soviet Union. They went bankrupt. BTW, it has been calculated that if the car companies made cars the way they contract to the governement (close to your ideal) they would cost USD 80,000 and up. If you want to buy grain from a local farmer and eat it, do so. It may actually be a good idea, and nobody is stopping you. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: Terry Flanagan Subject: Subscribe to ADSL Newsletter Organization: Bell Canada Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 20:16:53 GMT If you are interested in receiving a regular publication concerning Bell Canada`s plans for rolling out Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) service, please send me a note. ADSL will radically transform the way today's telephone networks are used. Instead of being limited to voice, text and low-resolution graphics, it will be a powerful, ubiquitous system, capable of delivering graphics and full-motion video, as well as voice and data. And the new technology can deliver all of this over the twisted-pair copper wiring we already have in our homes. Regards, Terry Flanagan Corporate Communications Bell Canada Tom Kanary Email: tekanary@on.bell.ca Bell Sygma TEKANARY 160 Elgin RM 1950 Phone: 613-830-6917 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 11:21:37 -0600 From: Chris Siegle Subject: Trying to Locate Company Information I am having a devil of a time locating even a contact number for a company called US LEC (USLEC?). I believe that it functions as a reseller, but am not sure. Can anybody there help me out? Thank you, Chris Siegle ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:48:42 +0100 From: Keith Parr Reply-To: kg.parr@iee.org.uk Organization: Information Management Subject: Searching the Archives Hello Mr. Townson: This is my first visit to the Telecom Archives and I spent it looking for a search function -- without success! Is that because I was looking in the wrong place? What I have in mind is the abiity to locate information by keyword. It seems to me that there is simply too much information to access by any other means, just readng through it would be very interesting but take the rest of my life! I hope you can help. Regards. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wish I could help you. The Telecom Archives needs a **great deal** of work, not the least of which involves installing a search function. Now you can at present do a search through the subject titles and author names which have appeared in the Digest since 1989. There are three index files which cover 1989-91, 1992-94, and 1995-96 in the 'back.issues' area of the archives. You can pull these files using anonymous FTP (or via the web) to your site and then search through them using grep or a similar search command. A typical line in the indexes reads like this: 15/451-500 Subject Title Here (Author Name Here) This means that the desired subject or author name appeared in Volume 15 and the bundle of back issues numbered 451-500. You would then go back to the archives and pull that bundle of back issues. The index is complete through about the middle of this year, but does not go back earlier than 1989; still, there are thirty or forty thousand entries. If you wish you can get extracts from the indexes by email via the Telecom Archives Email Information Service, using the SEARCH command in your email to the archives. This is an automated service, and to get a help file on how it works, send a letter to the address: tel-archives@massis.lcs.mit.edu The subject does not matter. In the text, put the following commands as shown below: REPLY yourname@site (this MUST be the first command) HELP (only if you want the general help file) INFO (only if you want the general information file list) INDEX (only if you want the archives index of files available) INFO search-hints INFO back-issues SEARCH "some string" (but ONLY after reading 'search hints') END (this must be the last command) ------------------------ All of this has been developed at one time another over the past several years, in large part by myself and with the help of many dedicated readers. The problem is, I am going broke! I am barely able financially to keep the Digest going, let alone devote more than a miniscule amount of time to the archives. Please readers, remember: this service is brought to you -- by you! Your annual subscription donations mean more to me than I could ever begin to express here. I *like* doing this service and want to continue it in the years ahead. **Please help me make it possible.** Your letters and gifts are appreciated and I encourage you to stay in touch. Thanks very much. TELECOM Digest / Post Office Box 4621 / Skokie, IL 60076-4621 PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #631 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 25 12:29:03 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA19785; Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:29:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:29:03 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611251729.MAA19785@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #632 TELECOM Digest Mon, 25 Nov 96 12:29:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 632 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson WirelessNOW Calendar of Events (Dave Donohue) Telephony at NY Inet Show (Al Niven) Help On Providing ISDN Long Distance Service (Jeff Buckingham) Someone Attempting to Bill Calls to my Number (Michael D. Adams) Bell Atlantic Caller ID Offer (Mike Quinn) BellSouth Says Some Companies Playing Pricing "Shell Games" (Mike King) MCI's Blast Through Bell's Arguments (Anthony S. Pelliccio) SAIC Buys Bellcore (oldbear@arctos.com) Another Free E-Mail With Advertising Site (Steven P. Bills) 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'. NOTE: Addresses of correspondents listed in this issue are provided for the sole purpose of facilitating correspondence between the people involved. Other collection of names/email addresses for any purpose whatsoever is expressly forbidden. 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: ddonohue@mindspring.com (Dave Donohue) Subject: WirelessNOW Calendar of Events Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:26:09 GMT Organization: WirelessNOW Reply-To: marketing@wirelessnow.com ************ WELCOME TO WIRELESSNOW'S CALENDAR OF EVENTS ************ This calendar of wireless industry events is sent each month compliments of WirelessNOW, putting wireless industry information online ... and on your desktop. TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. HOW TO USE THIS CALENDAR 2. LIST OF UPCOMING WIRELESS-RELATED EVENTS 3. SPECIAL BENEFITS AT THESE CONFERENCES 4. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO THIS LIST 5. ABOUT WIRELESSNOW ********************************************************************* 1. HOW TO USE THIS CALENDAR This calendar of events lists the date, conference name, venue, location, producer and contact number for major upcoming wireless-related conferences, meetings, seminars and other events around the world. Depending on your email program, the contents of this list may appear irregular onscreen. Some email programs that support tabs will display it in readable fashion in the text of your email message, but if not, the fields are separated by tabs and will open perfectly in any spreadsheet, database or word processor if you copy between the "=====" symbols and then paste into your document. 2. LIST OF UPCOMING WIRELESS-RELATED EVENTS ==================================================================== Date Title Location City Producer Contact Number November 18-19, 1996 AMTEX '96 Hotel InterContinental Miami, FL AMTA 202-331-7773 November 18-20, 1996 Telecommunications Network & Service Management Sheraton World Resort Orlando, FL Institute For International Research 800-999-3123 November 18-20, 1996 Int'l Congress On Commercial Trunked Radio Hotel InterContinental Miami, FL IMTA 202-331-7773 November 18-20, 1996 Customer Acquisition in Telecommunications The Watergate Hotel Washington, DC IQPC 800-882-8684 November 18-22 Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Processing UCLA Los Angeles, CA UCLA Extension 310-825-1047 November 20-22 Packaging Telecoms Services The Hyatt Regency Dallas, TX Institute For International Research 800-999-3123 December 2-3 Advanced Digital Communications: The Search for Efficient Signaling Methods UCLA Los Angeles, CA UCLA Extension 310-825-1047 December 2-3, 1996 Wireless Buildout San Francisco Marriott San Francisco, CA Shorecliff Communications 800-608-9641 December 4-6, 1996 Multirate Digital Filters and Applications UCLA Los Angeles, CA UCLA Extension 310-825-1047 December 4-6 International Wireless Expo '96 Tokyo E.J. Krause & Associates 301-986-7800 December 5-6, 1996 Understanding Cellular and PCS Technologies for Non-Engineers Radisson Hotel Newark Airport Newark, NJ TeleStrategies 703-734-7050 December 8-11 Communications India New Delhi, India Telecommunications Industry Association 703-907-7700 December 9, 1996 Understanding Cellular and PCS Technologies for Non-Engineers Sheraton Crystal City Hotell Washington, DC TeleStrategies 703-734-7050 December 10-11, 1996 Competing In The New Wireless Marketplace Sheraton Crystal City Hotel Washington, DC TeleStrategies 703-734-7050 January 19-22, 1997 PTC '97 Sheraton Waikiki Hotel Honolulu, HI Pacific Telecommunications Council 808-941-3789 January 22-23, 1997 Wireless Buildout TBA Orlando, FL Shorecliff Communications 800-608-9641 January 22-24, 1997 MexCom '97 TBA Mexico City, Mexico LATCOM 305-670-9444 January 28-29, 1997 Understanding Cellular and PCS Technologies for Non-Engineers Crystal City Hotel Washington, DC TeleStrategies 703-734-7050 January 29-30, 1997 Communications & Media Finance The Mark Hotel New York, NY Institute for International Research 800-999-3123 February 3-4, 1997 Wireless Buildout TBA Coeur D'Alene Shorecliff Communications 800-608-9641 February 11-14, 1997 Expo Comm Mexico '97 World Trade Center Mexico City, Mexico E.J. Krause & Associates 301-986-7800 February 25-26, 1997 Understanding Cellular and PCS Technologies for Non-Engineers Hyatt Regency Atlanta Atlanta, GA TeleStrategies 703-734-9371 March 3-5, 1997 InterCom '97 TBA Miami, FL LATCOM 305-670-9444 March 3-5, 1997 CTIA Wireless '97 Moscone Center San Francisco, CA CTIA 202-785-3842 March 4, 1997 Satellite Basics Hyatt Regency Crystal City Washington, DC Philips Business Information 800-777-5006 March 4-6, 1997 Expo Comm Wireless Hong Kong '97 Hong Kong Convention & Exhibit Center Hong Kong E.J. Krause & Associates 301-986-7800 March 5-7, 1997 Satellite 97: Countdown to the 21st Century Hyatt Regency Crystal City Washington, DC Philips Business Information 800-777-5006 March 18-21, 1997 Telexpo '97 Sao Paolo, Brazil Telecommunications Industry Association 703-907-7700 April 21-22, 1997 Introduction to Satellite Technology Seminar The Park Plaza Hotel San Francisco, CA Philips Business Information 800-777-5006 April 29-May 1, 1997 Midcom '97 Abu Dhabi Expo Center Abu Dhabi, UAE Telecommunications Industry Association 703-907-7700 May, 1997 Expo Comm Wireless Korea '97 Korea Exhibition Center Seoul, Korea E.J. Krause & Associates 301-986-7800 May 19-21, 1997 CelluComm '97 Doubletree - Paradise Valley Resort Scottsdale, AZ Zsigo Wireless 800-594-5102 May 19-23, 1997 Expo Comm Moscow '97 Krasnaya Presnya Fairgrounds Moscow, Russia E.J. Krause & Associates 301-986-7800 June 1-5, 1997 CANTO '97 TBA Caribbean Location LATCOM 305-670-9444 June 2-3, 1997 Introduction to Satellite Technology Seminar Hyatt Regency Bethesda Bethesda, MD Philips Business Information 800-777-5006 June 9-14, 1997 Asia Telecom '97 Singapore Telecommunications Industry Association 703-907-7700 June 23-24, 1997 AMTA Leadership Conference ANA Hotel Washington, DC AMTA 202-331-7773 July 2-5, 1997 Expo Comm '97 Georgia World Congress Center Atlanta, GA E.J. Krause & Associates 301-986-7800 August 13-15, 1997 AndesCom '97 TBA Andean Region LATCOM 305-670-9444 August 26-29, 1997 Expo Comm Brazil '97 Expo Center Norte Sao Paulo, Brazil E.J. Krause & Associates 301-986-7800 September 3-5, 1997 TelNets '97 TBA Monterrey, Mexico LATCOM 305-670-9444 September 8-14, 1997 Telecom Interactive '97 Geneva Telecommunications Industry Association 703-907-7700 October 1-3, 1997 CaribCom '97 TBA San Juan, Puerto Rico LATCOM 305-670-9444 November 11-15, 1997 PT/Wireless Comm Beijing '97 China International Exhibition Center Beijing, China Adsale People 408-986-8384 May 4-6, 1998 CelluComm '98 Fairmont Hotel Dallas, TX Zsigo Wireless 800-594-5102 May 4-10, 1998 Africa Telecom '98 Midrand, South Africa Telecommunications Industry Association 703-907-7700 October 10-17, 1999 World Telecom '99 Geneva Telecommunications Industry Association 703-907-7700 ==================================================================== 3. SPECIAL BENEFITS AT THESE CONFERENCES Thank you again for subscribing to our WirelessNOW Calendar of Events. If you decide to attend any of these conferences or meetings, please mention to the organizers that you found out about it from WirelessNOW - in some cases it may entitle you to a discount or special privileges there. 4. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO THIS LIST Please send email to editor@wirelessnow.com to add events, or make corrections to the existing list. For additions, be sure to include the following: Date - including full duration of event Location - city, state, province, country as appropriate Venue - name of hotel, convention center, exhibit hall, etc. Event title - how we should refer to this event Event description - we will also put a notice in our Daily Wireless Update, so please include a brief description of who should attend, topics to be discussed, exhibitors, anticipated number of attendees, etc. Contact information - phone and/or fax number, URL, email address or physical address to get additional information about the event. 5. ABOUT WIRELESSNOW WirelessNOW provides a daily email and Web-based information service for professionals in the wireless industry covering industry news, product announcements, system launches, management changes, financial results, mergers and much more. The service also includes live trade show coverage from the industry's major events, original monthly columns on wireless in Europe, Canada, at the FCC and in the world of hyper-technology - all for about $1/day. For further information about WirelessNOW's services, you can reach us at: http://www.wirelessnow.com marketing@wirelessnow.com 202-293-1111 ******* THANK YOU FOR READING THE WIRELESSNOW CALENDAR OF EVENTS ******* ------------------------------ From: alniven@earthlink.net (Al Niven) Subject: Telephony at NY Inet Show Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 16:14:00 GMT Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc. The room which has been assigned the conference is 1A10 at the Javits Center. Thursday, December 12 9:45 AM - 12:45 PM Technology Mike Po, Director of Engineering, Live Media, Netscape "Architeching a Second Tier Global Communications Infrastructure" Blake Irving, Group Manager, Internet Platform and Tools Divison, Microsoft Corporation. "Internet Communications in Real-Time: The Technology, Challenges and Opportunities in Making it Pervasive" During the Internet Telephony Gateways Panel: Past, Present & Future the following people will be making presentations: VocalTec Representative: Daniel Berninger, VP Gateways, VocalTec, Inc. Dialogic Representative: Larry Fromm, VP Business Development, Dialogic Corp. Lucent Representative: Dennis Specht, Director, Internet Telephony, Lucent Onlive! Representative: Rod Macgregor,Chairman & CTO , Onlive! Technologies NetXchange Representive: David J. Blumberg, VP Business Development, NetXchange Corporation Rick Yeomans, Internet & Communications Group, Intel Corp. "A Business Case for Voice and Video on the Internet" Plus...Technology Updates from: Elon Ganor, CEO, VocalTec, Inc. Michael Goldstein, CEO, Voxware, Inc. 2:00 - 4:30 Intranet Applications Ken Guy, VP MICOM Communcations "A Voice/Fax Overlay for any Enterprise-Wide IP Network" Asaf Mohar, CEO, VDONet "The Role of Video on the Internet - Today and the Future" Martin Dunsmuir, General Manager Server Products, Progressive Networks "Improving Corporate Communications on the Intranet" Paige Albiniak, Voice Technology New, Phillips Communications "Videoconferencing and other VON Technologies: Over Corporate Intranets: How They Effect the Bottom Line" Friday December 13th 9:45 - 12:15 Regulatory Bruce Jacobs, Consel VON Coalition Glenn B. Manishin, Blumenfeld & Cohen "Regulation of the Communications Functions of the Internet" Kevin Werbach, Office of Planning and Policy, FCC "The Internet and the Telephony Industry: Battle or Marriage?" Charles A. Ross, President, Acanthus Corporation, BEEDNET Group "Interconnect Techniques and Rate Aspects of VON Assisted Global Communications" 1:00 - 4:15 In the Panel Discussion - "How a Group of Startups can drive the world's Telcos out of business" the following people are scheduled to appear: Lee Kaplan, President, Delta Three Al Niven, CEO, Telecom Coop Taka Migimatsu, Tokis Corp. Gregg Freishtat, Senior Vice President, Premiere Technologies "Cross Media Messaging" Hilary Mine, Senior VP, Probe Research, Inc. "Who Cares about Telephony over the Internet?" Thom Byxbe, President, Knowledge Technologies, Inc. "Talk Your Walk! - Real World Applications" More information regarding the conference is available at: http://events.iworld.com/fall96/iw/sponsored/pulver.shtml ------------------------------ From: JEFF BUCKINGHAM Subject: Help On Providing ISDN Long Distance Service Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 21:30:58 -0800 My company is in the process of setting up long distance service for our customers who are beginning to deploy ISDN local telephone lines. We have been in the long distance business for 13 years, first using a Datapoint Infowitch (IRIS) and then a Stromberg Carlson DCO since 1987. We have found information on provisioning this type of service to be difficult to obtain and often contradictory so I am appealing to my friends at TELECOM Digest to get the "last word" on how to provision this service. So far we have ordered a separate trunk group of Feature Group D's from Pacific Bell to be provisioned on a T-1 that is B8ZS/ESF. We plan to plug this into our "64k clear channel capable" shelf in our Stromber Carlson DCO. (BTW the Stromberg will take B8ZS/ESF T-1's but it will not take PRI until release 15 in early 1997) We are attempting to order facilities to terminate these calls nation/world wide from AT&T or MCI and are having trouble placing the orders. We already have a substantial LD network built throughout California for normal equal access calls. Here are my questions: 1. Can we handle voice ISDN calls on our regular LD network or do we have to provision a separate network? If yes, How would we do this? do we have to get Bell to open up FGD to let those calls through? 2. Do carriers charge customers more to terminate ISDN calls than regular switched LD calls? 3. Do we need to order separate trunks from MCI or AT&T for ISDN calls or can we terminate them over our existing T-1's. I would really appreciate any help from the group, my usual cast of characters are just as lost as I am on this one. GST/Call America 4251 South Higuera Street Suite 800 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 e-mail: jeff_buckingham@callamerica.com Phone: 805-545-5100 (MyLine Voice and Fax) Home Page: www.callamerica.com ------------------------------ From: mda-961124a@triskele.com (Michael D Adams) Subject: Someone Attempting to Bill Calls to my Number Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:02:39 GMT Organization: Triskele Consulting Reply-To: mda-961124a@triskele.com I just got back from a weekend trip out of town, to discover a rather disturbing sequence of messages on my answering machine. It seems that someone or some individuals have attempted to bill some long distance calls, through a major long distance carrier, to my phone number. This happened five times while I was away, and then once again since I got home today (Sunday). I have called the long distance carrier in question to leave a complaint. They've noted my problem in their records, but they suggest that the situation must be handled by my local telco ... which conveniently closes its customer service line on Sundays. Aside from the obvious techniques of following up with the local telco (and leaving a message at the Public Service Commission regarding my inability to get customer service), and keeping an eye on my phone bill, is there anything I can do to make sure someone's not making calls at my expense? Also, just out of curiosity, is it possible in this situation that someone could manage to get the call billed to my phone number, even though I did not "press one or say 'yes' now ..."? Thanks, Michael D. Adams Triskele Consulting Baltimore, Maryland ma@triskele.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A good service which will help reduce (but not eliminate entirely) the risk of having unwanted collect calls on your phone bill is available. Ask your local telco (or probably any of the Big Three long distance carriers to put 'Billed Number Screening' on your phone line(s). This will cause your number to be included on a 'negative listing' which all telcos and quite a few long distance carriers (including the three major carrriers) will honor. When an operator from one of the participating companies tries to put through a collect call (hopefully by calling you first and asking permission) the call will get locked out and the operator will get a message on the screen saying 'collect and third party calls are not accepted at that number. Select another billing option.' Callers who try to zero-plus dial you on a collect basis will get an intercept message saying the same thing. Note I said this will reduce the risk but not eliminate it, mainly because not all carriers subscribe to the database. A few, such as Integratel maintain their own such database, and you need to get included on theirs as a separate thing. I think Pilgrom Telephone is another one which maintains their own such negative listing. But if you get listed on the database maintained by your local telco in cooperation with several long distance carriers as well as the datbase maintained by Integratel and other sleaze operators, you will have covered about 95 percent of the possible sources of collect calls incoming to your line. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Bell Atlantic Caller ID Offer From: bah-rover1@juno.com (Mike Quinn) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 11:52:17 EST Apropos of the recent thread about dealing with annoying phone calls, I called Bell Atlantic yesterday to activate *69 (auto call back) in an attempt to deal with a spate of hang-up calls at home (we don't subscribe to caller ID). We assume it's a school friend/non-friend of our son, and aren't quite prepared to involve the police -- we just want him or her to knock it off. When I mentioned the reason for activating (actually, removing the blocking), the very helpful customer service rep advised that BA has a promotion that allows one to try Caller ID for 30 days for free, using a box that they will mail to you. At the end of 30 days, one can keep the service at $7.50 a month and/or buy the box for around $50+, or cancel and mail the box back. I didn't notice any advertisements about this in my BA phone bill or in the {Washington Post}, so perhaps the promotion is news to others as well. By the way, regarding the recent post on "free email" a' la Juno and others, I and my family and coworkers are absolutely sold on it. It is flexible, easy to use, and customizable -- my grade school son has his own address and uses it every day. It has local and 800 numbers, and has a variety of dialing options so you can use it from a hotel, inside a PBX, etc. The advertisements are unobtrusive (indeed, until the last week or so, there were none), and in the form of netscape type banners, rather than email/spam. That may change as more and more people use it; and I AM noticing more and more xxx@juno.com addresses of late in various digests and forums. The only real disadvantage I've experienced is that you can't attach files like MSWORD and EXCEL. They have an 800 number to order the free software, but it's sitting in my office, and I am not; feel free to email me (bah-rover1@juno.com) and I'll pass on the number, if it hasn't already appeared. They also have a very helpful technical assistance desk. Regards, Mike Quinn ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Says Some Companies Playing Pricing "Shell Games" Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:49:16 PST ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 10:19:11 -0500 (EST) From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH SAYS SOME COMPANIES ARE PLAYING PRICING "SHELL GAMES" BELLSOUTH SAYS SOME COMPANIES ARE PLAYING PRICING "SHELL GAMES" WITH LOCAL TOLL RATES Company Cites Latest Marketing Efforts to Confuse Consumers (Miami) -- Throughout Florida competition between local phone companies and their long distance rivals for local toll call customers is in high gear. Consumers are receiving an avalanche of letters, phone calls and advertising from long distance companies. But BellSouth says "Buyer Beware" to the new marketing efforts which are confusing customers. For example, the latest offer from AT&T highlights a 10 cent a minute rate for some local toll calls in Florida. AT&T's Florida President even said that the "10 cent a minute rate, combined with long distance service, makes AT&T the best telecommunications choice in the state." But BellSouth says, watch out for higher bills. "Since June, more than 100,000 consumers have switched to other telecommunications companies to handle local toll calls," said BellSouth spokesman Spero Canton. "But after receiving their first bill, tens of thousands of them have switched right back to BellSouth. Most were either unaware they had actually switched to another local toll call provider or were under the false impression that they would save money." At the beginning of 1996, BellSouth implemented a 25 cent -flat rate calling plan for 288 routes throughout Florida. On these local toll routes BellSouth customers can talk for as long as they want for 25 cents per call. Most customers save with the 25 cent flat rate per call, compared to a 10 cent per minute rate. Under BellSouth's flat rate plan, a 15 minute call would cost 25 cents. However the competitor's offer at 10 cents a minute, the total would be $1.50, six times more than BellSouth's flat rate. "There's a great deal of confusion on what's a better deal. If you make one or two minute calls, then the 10 cent per minute rate might be O.K. Otherwise, switching local toll call service could end up costing you much more money. It's sad that some companies hope consumers do not know the difference between 10 cents per minute and 25 cent per call," said Canton. The local toll call areas are regions where BellSouth used to be the exclusive long distance provider. Recently, these regions were opened to competition, allowing long distance companies to provide service. "Many customers are uncertain about which pricing plan is best. The best thing you can do is to analyze your phone bill as well as your calling patterns and choose the plan which fits your needs the best," said Canton. For Information Contact: Spero C. Canton, (305)347-5455 ---------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Subject: MCI's Blast Through Bell's Arguments Date: 25 Nov 1996 09:50:02 -0500 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. I read an interesting blurb in Inter@ctive last week. Seems MCI is saying the Bell's are exagerating the cost of upgrades to their networks due to internet traffic. Just another example of the old AT&T rulebook in action. Tony [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did MCI or the article explain *how* Bell is doing this? The claim is one thing; what proof did they offer; what examples did they cite? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 08:44:28 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: SAIC Buys Bellcore SAIC BUYS BELLCORE Bellcore, the research group owned jointly by the seven Baby Bells, has been acquired by Science Applications International Corp., a government contractor that provides consulting, systems-integration, national-security, transportation and health-care services. Executives familiar with the deal have estimated the cost of the acquisition at about $700 million. source: Wall Street Journal November 22, 1996 ------------------------------ Subject: Another Free E-Mail With Advertising Site From: sbills@juno.com (Steven P Bills) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:25:24 EST Your readers may want to know about another free e-mail service. I have been using this service for about four months and am absolutely thrilled by it! The ads come up on a small window above my e-mail, and if I am interested in what I see, I can click on it to see more. All ads are from reputable companies, and only reflect items you personally may be interested in. Best of all, if there is no local number, you can call an 800 number from anywhere. You can contact Juno at (800)654-JUNO. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #632 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Nov 25 14:14:02 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA29498; Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:14:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:14:02 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611251914.OAA29498@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #633 TELECOM Digest Mon, 25 Nov 96 14:14:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 633 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Article on the Perils of Global Virtual Nets (Adam Gaffin) Four New Codes For Texas (John Cropper) Four New Area Codes For Texas Announced (Pierre Thomson) Canada vs The Net (Dave Harrison) Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was 500 Numbers) (Joseph Singer) Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was 500 Numbers) (Nils Andersson) Re: The Purpose of "500" Numbers (Michael J. Graven) Reaching a 500 Number (Barry Margolius) Re: Ameritech Questions (Jude Crouch) Re: Ameritech Questions (Ron Kritzman) Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts (Nils Andersseon) Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts (Chris Jones) Errors in zone4.uk.44 Archives File (sic102@york.ac.uk) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Linc Madison) List of Exchanges Involved in NJ 201/973 Split (John Cropper) 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'. NOTE: Email names and addresses appearing herein are intended for the sole purpose of correspondence between writers on the topics discussed in this issue. All other collection of email addresses is forbidden under the copyright held on this work by the publisher. 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: agaffin@nww.com (Adam Gaffin) Subject: Article on the Perils of Global Virtual Nets Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 16:57:12 GMT Organization: Network World Fusion {Network World} this week has an article on global virtual private networking services offered by several carriers. Writers Ellen Clifford and Melodie Reagan say these services can make international networking easier but warn that it's still buyer beware -- carriers don't always deliver what they promise and some may be using initial customers as guinea pigs to test out their offerings. You can read the article online on Network World Fusion (http://www.nwfusion.com). On the main page, enter 5080 in the DocFinder box. If you haven't used NWFusion before, you'll have to register first, but it's free (and unlike other password-protected sites, you can bookmark our pages and never have to enter your login info again). Adam Gaffin Online Editor, Network World agaffin@nww.com / (508) 820-7433 ------------------------------ From: psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) Subject: Four New Codes For Texas Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 22:47:58 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com From the Houston Chronicle 7:07 PM 11/22/1996 More regions to get new area codes AUSTIN (AP) -- New area codes for parts of the state currently in the 817 and 210 calling regions were announced Friday by the Texas Public Utility Commission and likely will take effect next year. The number 940 will be assigned to the north section of the current 817 calling area, a 25-county area including Wichita Falls and Denton. The southern part of the 817 area code, which encompasses parts of 23 counties and Waco, will be assigned a 254 area code. The Fort Worth and Arlington metropolitan areas will keep the 817 area code. Parts of 34 counties, including Uvalde, New Braunfels, Fredericksburg and Kerrville in the northern section of the current 210 calling area will become the 830 area code. The southern part of the calling area, a seven-county area including Laredo, Brownsville and McAllen, will become the 956 area code. San Antonio will retain the 210 area code. PUC officials expect the new codes for the 817 calling region to take effect first because the area code is quickly running out of available numbers. The new codes for the 210 calling area could be in place by summer 1997, according to the PUC. John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ From: Pierre Thomson Subject: Four New Area Codes For Texas Announced Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 22:04:01 -0800 Organization: MHVNet, the Mid Hudson Valley's Internet connection According to the {Houston Chronicle}: The Texas PUC has announced the following new area codes in the state of Texas: 817 will split into three codes next year. 940 is assigned to the northern half of the area. 254 is assigned to the southern half. The Fort Worth - Arlington area will keep 817. The 210 area code will split into three codes. 830 in the northern part of that area. 956 is assigned to the Rio Grande Valley. San Antonio will keep 210. (Thanks to Stephen Schuster of TX) Pierre Thomson Telecom Manager Rifton Enterprises See full listing of area code splits at: http://www1.mhv.net/~mmommsen/npanxx.htm ------------------------------ From: Davew@cris.com (Dave Harrison) Subject: Canada vs The Net Date: 25 Nov 1996 14:57:33 GMT Organization: Concentric Internet Services 11-23-96 OTTAWA (ITN) * In an unprecedented move, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has ordered hearings into complaints that Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel is promoting hatred on the Internet. Commission head Max Yalden said Friday he believes the commission has the jurisdiction to shut down Zundel's Web site, even though it's based at a Web server in California. "The signal's being picked up here, and where it's originating doesn't make any difference," Yalden said. Zundel's site contains material disputing the Holocaust and detailing his numerous legal battles. There is no technical way for Canadian Internet companies to block Zundel's site, but Yalden said the commission has jurisdiction over telephonic communications and Internet messages are transmitted over telephone lines. He said the commission's aim is "to stop (Zundel's) signal if we can. It's not all that easy, but that would be our intention, to stop him from doing that (posting material on the web). ------------------------------ From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Numbers) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 15:06:58 GMT Organization: AccessOne Reply-To: dov@pulm1.accessone.com Zev Rubenstein wrote: > CARICKINC@aol.com wrote: >> Has anyone ever heard of something called a "500" number available >> from ATT? > To which our Esteemed Editor gave a very thorough reply. The service is > called "True Connections", and for further details, you can visit the AT&T > website devoted to it at: > http://www.att.com/trueconnections/ > The service allows you to change the number to which your calls are > forwarded based on a time-of-day schedule, or to have a sequence of up > to three numbers to cycle through. In both cases, callers get voice > mail if you are not reached. As Pat noted, you can use your own voice > mail if you like. You can adjust the number of rings yourself, and > override the number list on the fly. MCI has a similar service though MCI's service is not quite as sophisticated as AT&T's. MCI's service will answer "MCI 500 service" and tell you that it is connecting to the number. However, you do not hear ring back. If the number is busy you'll get a recording saying that the party cannot be reached and to try later. MCI's service is $1.00 per month. Of course it took MCI about six months to get the service so it would work properly with anything other than a direct dial. That's another difference. With AT&T you can give the caller a "PIN" so they don't pay for the call. The only alternative MCI has other than direct billing with 1+ is 0+ and bill to either a calling card or a major credit card. Joseph ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Numbers) Date: 25 Nov 1996 17:16:54 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , Zev Rubenstein writes: > You can also pick a vanity number, if it is an available > number in the list of 500-NXX assigned to AT&T (there is no 500 number > portability yet). I do not believe portability is in the cards. Each LD operator OWNS certains prefixes. AT&T owns a bunch, about 30 or so last I checked. For obvious reasons, 288 is one of them. > you will use to bill the service. So, if you choose a home (consumer) > phone number to bill the service to, you will get True Connections. If > you put the billing on a business line you will get EasyReach. This is a truly nifty idea, which they however botched in a couple of important ways. Background: Most carriers seem to inter-operate, but note that when you dial a 500 number, the carrier is whoever owns the prefix, NOT the carrier you have chosen by default or design (10xxxx etc may be accepted by the system, but your call is processed by the prefix owner regardsless.) There are three ways a call can be billed: 1) Billed to the calling phone, dialled as 1-500-xxx-xxxx. 2) Billed to the callee, using a 4-digit PIN, dial 0-500-xxx xxxx and zzzz at the prompt or e.g. 1-800-CALL ATT, 500-xxx-xxxx, zzzz. 3) Billed to an AT&T (or other Telco card but NOT credit card), dial 0-500-xxx xxxx and zzzz at the prompt or e.g. 1-800-CALL ATT, 500-xxx-xxxx, 0#, zzz zzz zzzz zzzz. Note that you can forward the 500 to out-of-country; in cases 1 and 3 the caller gets notified of the charges by country name, not dollar amount (at least with AT&T). Flub: The flub is that (possibly because of the possible extra charges) 500 is blocked at most PBXs and cannot be dialed from outside of the US, or at least not from outside the NANP. (A telco adept can use USA Direct numbers from a foreign country, but requires that he knows how and has either US Telco credit card or your four digit pin.) Another great idea that _almost_ worked. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 13:49:37 GMT Subject: Re: The Purpose of "500" Numbers From: mjg@att.com (Michael J Graven) Reply-To: mjg@att.com (Michael J Graven) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T 500 numbers are sometimes known > as 'Follow Me' numbers. Currently, we're marketing them under the True Connections plan. See http://www.att.com/trueconnections/ for the whole spiel. Michael J. Graven (mjg@att.com) AT&T Consumer Laboratory, Murray Hill, NJ ------------------------------ From: bfm@pobox.com (Barry Margolius) Subject: Reaching a 500 Number Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 15:40:45 GMT Organization: INTERNET AMERICA My company's pbx doesn't allow access to 500 numbers, so I tried my offbrand long distance calling card (dial 800 number, enter pin, enter number), and it fails too. I'm just curious whether this is the norm. Do most of you find that you cannot reach area code 500 numbers with a calling card? Thanks, Barry F Margolius, New York City bfm@pobox.com For PGP Key, finger bfm@panix.com ------------------------------ From: jcrouch@MCS.COM (Jude Crouch) Subject: Re: Ameritech Questions Date: 23 Nov 1996 08:44:49 -0600 Organization: Crouch Enterprises, Oak Park, IL Paul Palley wrote: > In article , eric@fudge.uchicago.edu > (Eric Fischer) wrote: >> I received a postcard in the mail from Ameritech a few days ago with a >> list of the exchanges being moved to 773. It's rather long, or I'd >> type it in here. Anyway, I assume other Ameritech customers will also >> be getting these in the near future (if Chicago's postal service can >> be trusted). > Ameritech also publishes a prefix list at: > http://www.ameritech.com/news/service/areacode/illinois_prefix773.html A database of the changes is available at: http://www.mcs.net/~nponet/new.chicago.area.codes/ Includes all exchanges, the new A/C if it changes, the first date of change, and the drop-dead dates. Jude Crouch (jcrouch@pobox.com) - Computing since 1967! Crouch Enterprises - Telecom, Internet & Unix Consulting Oak Park, IL 708-848-0145 URL: http://www.pobox.com/~jcrouch ------------------------------ From: Ron Kritzman Subject: Re: Ameritech Questions Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 08:45:35 -0600 Organization: Kritzman Communications Tad Cook wrote: > Here is a list of all prefixes in 312, 773 and 708. I got this from > the NPA for Windows program, a great shareware product ... Apparently the author is geting his data from Ameritech. I see no prefixes from MFS, TCG, etc. Ron ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts Date: 25 Nov 1996 17:16:56 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , psyber@mindspring.com writes: > Harshbarger's aides said the Nynex plan was inconvenient and could > confuse customers. It would force everyone to dial at least 10 digits > for even local phone calls and could result in customers on the same > street or even in the same house having different area codes. I can never understand this. Why would _everybody_ have to dial ten or eleven digits. Why not stick with the old convention of seven digits = same area code as caller? Ten (actually eleven) digit dialling is otherwise so common in large metropolitan areas that the conceptual leap to overlays should be minor. Most people in NYC, LA, Boston, Chigago etc. already think of phone numbers as ten-digits. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: Chris Jones Subject: Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts Date: 24 Nov 1996 16:35:20 -0500 Organization: BBN Corp. Systems and Technologies In article psyber@mindspring.com writes: > Attorney General Scott Harshbarger backs carving two new area codes > out of the existing 617 and 508 codes, a move that would require more > than one million residents in eastern Massachusetts to change their > phone numbers. The Attorney General is widely believed to be planning to run for governor in 1998. I don't know if his position on this split will help or hurt him, but it makes me less likely to vote for him, since overlays seem inevitable and more logical (and I was kind of looking forward to having two area codes in my house when we get our next phone line!) . From what I understand, in about another ten years, we may require ANOTHER new area code or two, so either we get overlays then, or some people are going to change their numbers twice in 10 years (and three times in 20 years), all without moving. > In several communities, including Newton, Watertown, Somerville, > Charlestown and Framingham, there would actually be two area > codes. It's interesting to note that, with the exception of Charlestown, where I live, all the other communities are municipalities (i.e., cities or towns). Charlestown is a neighborhood of Boston, having been annexed in the late 19th century. It's about a mile square, with about 15,000 residents and not an outsized business community (i.e., not a lot of phones compared to other places) so it's hard to believe that there is an overriding necessity to divide it in two. Can anyone say why this division is being considered (and where)? I'm guessing that maybe we're served by a couple of different central offices, and the split would be made along that line. Chris Jones clj@bbn.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, the threat of 'having two area codes in the same house' is nothing but a scare tactic being pushed by people who do not want overlays. My contact at Ameritech pointed out what should be obvious, but what the anti-overlay people seem to be ignoring: there will always be people in the old existing or 'traditional' area code who are discontinuing their service or otherwise relinquishing their number. Therefore there will always be a certain number of 'left-overs' laying around unused from the old area code. No area code yet has ever gotten to the point that literally not a single number remained unused. So although the general rule might be that new service in a community gets assigned to the new 'overlay' area code, someone who has additional service installed in their home will certainly be able to get the same area code as before if that is what they want. A company will not have one area code on the phone on someone's desk and a different area code on the next desk over. Ditto, even within reason on the same block as new exchanges and area codes open up. You don't want to be the one house on your block with a different area code? You can probably have one of the traditional ones. Now if everyone insisted on staying 'traditional' then of course this could not be done. But a lot of people won't care either way and some people may specifically want the new area code. But things will never get to the point that there is physically not a single number unused in an appropriate exchange/area code so that a same exchange/area code number cannot be assigned in situations where it would be appropriate to do so; ie; an additional line installed on a multi-line phone in an office, etc. It is much the same thing as with 800/888 now. Routinely, new toll free numbers are generally getting put in 888 but can you get an 800 number? Sure ... is the choice of numbers to pick from from very good? ... No. There will always be people turning off their 800 service; consequently there will always be a few 800 numbers around for use. I must say however that when I read here about the planned area code split in San Jose, my first (admittedly evil) thought was they should run the split right through the center of John Higdon's house. Seven of his lines could be on one area code and the other seven or eight lines would have to be on the other. To call from his kitchen to his bathroom would require eleven digit dialing! :) I wonder if he should be given a 'grace period' where dialing either way would be permitted? Anyway, overlays are not as bad as they may seem to some people. My Ameritech contact said the thought of most of the people he works with would be to overlay with some geographic objectives in mind whenever possible. A new industrial complex on one side ot town is opening and needs a thousand phone lines? Okay, they get the new code. You want a second or third line in your house? You probably would not get the new code, particularly if you objected. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sic102@york.ac.uk Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 15:26:03 GMT Subject: Errors in zone4.uk.44 Archives File Some of the information contained in the "zone4.uk.44.detailed" document is inaccurate. This is mainly the case in area codes of more than four digits; indeed very few codes longer than this exist. For example, 1867xx has been integrated into 1865. Broadly speaking, codes of over four digits only exist in parts of Scotland and rural Northern Ireland. More information can be found at Oftel's website (www.open.gov.uk/oftel/oftelhm.htm). Steven Collins sic102@york.ac.uk [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dave Leibold and Carl Moore work hard at maintaining those files, so I know when they see your message here they will look into it and see what can be done for corrections. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 19:06:18 -0800 Nils Andersson wrote: > I would propose that the solution be to split the service, one type of > toll-free being totally toll-free to the caller (and the callee may have > to pick up the 35c), another requiring coin same as for a local call to > access the toll-free number (this is the case in many European countries, > toll free requires coin, but is usually unlimited time, whereas local > calls even when local calls are not). I have a much better idea. Simply require payphone owners to complete calls to 800/888 numbers at no cost, and don't reimburse them a damned thing for it. Why is there this sudden rush to compensate payphone owners for something which has a marginal cost to them of ZERO? The only cost is an "opportunity cost" in that their equipment is in use for a non-revenue purpose. SO WHAT? Is *anyone* claiming that owning a payphone under the existing rules is not highly profitable? I don't see many COCOT owners going bankrupt. I don't see any shortage of people willing to put COCOTs on the street under the existing rules. It seems that the sole purpose of payphone deregulation is to permit corporations that are already highly profitable to gouge the public for their own windfall profits. I say, to hell with all of them. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ From: psyber@mindspring.com (John Cropper) Subject: List of Exchanges Involved in NJ 201/973 Split Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:38:17 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > Robert Casey wrote: >> Was wonddering if the list of which exchanges will go into the new >> 973 area code splitting off of 201 in NJ, and those exchanges that >> will stay in 201, is avaliable yet? I looked at Bell Atlantic's >> web site, didn't find anything there, and nothing at Bellcore's >> either. > You won't find anything at the Bellcore-NANPA website. > I would *assume* that Bell Atlantic would eventually put something up on > their website, as well as the websites of: > Pierre Thompson (Rifton Enterprises) > http://www1.mhv.net/~Bruderhof/npanxx.htm > and John Cropper (NIS: Nexus Information Services) > http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm/ > when Bell Atlantic releases further information. There is no 'official response' as of yet, from Bell Atlantic, and I'm still working to determine the boundary line in the 908 split, but here is the 201 info, based on info from 10/01/96 ... NORTHERN NEW JERSEY AREA CODE CHANGE INFORMATION EXCHANGE PREFIXES MOVING FROM AREA CODE 201 TO 973 ON MAY 1, 1997 203 205 207 208 209 213 219 225 226 227 228 230 231 235 238 239 242 243 244 247 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 263 266 267 268 274 275 278 279 281 282 283 284 285 292 293 299 300 301 303 304 305 306 308 312 316 318 323 325 326 328 331 334 335 338 340 341 344 345 347 357 361 364 365 366 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 383 386 389 395 396 397 398 399 402 403 404 407 408 409 412 414 415 416 421 423 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 442 443 448 449 450 454 455 456 458 463 465 466 467 468 470 471 472 473 478 480 481 482 483 484 485 490 491 492 497 503 504 506 509 510 513 514 515 516 517 523 532 533 535 538 539 540 542 543 546 560 562 564 565 566 571 572 575 578 579 581 584 586 589 591 593 595 596 597 602 603 605 606 608 613 614 616 618 619 621 622 623 624 625 627 628 631 633 635 636 639 642 643 644 645 648 649 650 655 660 661 663 667 669 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 680 682 684 690 691 694 696 697 698 701 702 704 705 708 713 715 716 724 726 728 729 730 731 733 734 736 738 739 740 742 743 744 746 748 751 754 759 761 762 763 764 765 770 772 773 777 778 779 783 785 786 787 790 799 802 806 808 812 815 817 822 824 826 827 829 831 834 835 838 839 844 846 853 857 859 870 872 874 875 877 881 882 884 887 890 892 893 895 898 899 904 905 910 912 916 918 919 921 922 923 924 926 927 942 948 952 956 961 962 966 971 977 982 983 984 989 992 993 994 ALL OTHER FORMER 201 EXCHANGE PREFIXES REMAIN IN THE 201 AREA CODE. Permissive dialing period begins May 1, 1997. Permissive dialing period ends November 1, 1997. Test numbers: (973) xxx-xxxx Any of these give a recording if successfully dialed. John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #633 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 26 11:08:28 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA29448; Tue, 26 Nov 1996 11:08:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 11:08:28 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611261608.LAA29448@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #634 TELECOM Digest Tue, 26 Nov 96 11:08:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 634 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts (Bill Horne) Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts (John Grossi) Re: Reaching a 500 Number (Nils Andersson) Re: Reaching a 500 Number (John Levine) Re: Reaching a 500 Number (Linc Madison) Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was 500 Numbers) (Bob Goudreau) Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was 500 Numbers) (simg@netcom.com) Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory (raptor1@pdt.net) Re: Canada vs The Net (Nils Andersson) Re: Canada vs The Net (mexitech@netcom.com) Re: Someone Attempting to Bill Calls to my Number (Art Kamlet) 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'. NOTE: Names and email addresses shown herein are for the exclusive use of the correspondents named to facilitate correspondence on the topics discussed in this issue. All other name/email address collections are prohibited. 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: bhorne@lynx.dac.neu.edu (Bill Horne) Subject: Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts Date: 26 Nov 1996 13:36:45 GMT Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA psyber@mindspring.com wrote: > From the Massachusetts PSC: > HARSHBARGER DECIDES TO SPLIT NEW PHONE AREA CODES > Wednesday, October 23, 1996 [snip] > Assistant Attorney General Daniel Mitchell said another concern was > Nynex's control of nearly two-thirds of the existing numbers in the > 617 and 508 areas. Mitchell said Nynex could gain a competitive > advantage through its control of the numbers, since many businesses > perceive them as having additional value. > ``That competitive advantage is mitigated if you split the area > codes,'' Mitchell said. Mitchell is apparently unaware of the FCC's order implementing Local Number Portability. As of 4/1/98, all exchanges in the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) in and around Boston will be equipped to allow for "Service Provider Portability", which means that anyone who wants to chance dial tone providers will be able to keep their old number. It's such a hard life on Beacon Hill, all those pesky Federal notices to read in addition to what your boss tells you to do ... Bill Horne bhorne@lynx.neu.edu ------------------------------ From: fgoldstein@bbn.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 17:15:18 EST Organization: BBN Corp. In article Chris Jones writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note] > ...So although the general rule might be that new service in a community > gets assigned to the new 'overlay' area code, someone who has additional > service installed in their home will certainly be able to get the same > area code as before if that is what they want.... > Anyway, overlays are not as bad as they may seem to some people. My > Ameritech contact said the thought of most of the people he works with > would be to overlay with some geographic objectives in mind whenever > possible. A new industrial complex on one side ot town is opening and > needs a thousand phone lines? Okay, they get the new code. You want a > second or third line in your house? You probably would not get the > new code, particularly if you objected. PAT] Quite true. There are two myths about overlays that are being perpetrated. One: All new lines must go in the new code. Two: Overlays require ten-digit (or eleven-digit) dialing for all calls. The second myth is dispelled by New York's experience with 917: You only dial it when calling the other area code. I' ve proposed to the Mass. DPU that the overlay be used for "bulk" numbers, like Direct Inward Dialing blocks, pagers, fax servers, etc., with 617 numbers available to multi-number subscribers *for a premium* (to discourage casual use, and reserve them for "prime" numbers like a business's listed number and residence main numbers). This gets around FCC "service-specific" rules since it's based only on quantity of numbers (>1/line) rather than service (wireline vs. radio, etc.) This could even put a PBX trunk in the overlay and leave other trunks behind. Then, 7-digit dialing could be specified to ALWAYS go to 617, even if the incoming number is not in 617. This shouldn't be a major software problem. And as Pat said, there will always be some vacant numbers. If we price DID blocks in the old NPA higher than in the new, then users like me (at the office, where we have a few thousand numbers in 617-873) would stop getting new numbers in 617, and get the bulk numbers in 781, even if we keep a few 617's around for "public" listed numbers. Over time, freed-up DID blocks will keep the supply available. (I'd be happy to move my cell phone.) Also, we probably need *11 digit* dialing, since the new overlay NPA is already in use as a prefix code. Re: towns split, in 617, at least, this is an artifact caused by a few corners of towns being in different COs. Charlestown, for instance, is served by the Bowdoin Square CO in downtown Boston, but there may be a few corners (the Edison plant annexed from Everett?) elsewhere. Newton is almost all served by the Newton CO, but a small part of Chestnut Hill is served by Brookline. ("Chestnut Hill" is a postal name which spans three municipalities in three counties, served by at least three COs.) Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein@bbn.com BBN Corp., Cambridge MA USA +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: John Grossi Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 8:29:55 EST Subject: Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts > In article psyber@mindspring.com > writes: >> Attorney General Scott Harshbarger backs carving two new area codes >> out of the existing 617 and 508 codes, a move that would require more >> than one million residents in eastern Massachusetts to change their >> phone numbers. > The Attorney General is widely believed to be planning to run for > governor in 1998. I don't know if his position on this split will > Him versus's Joe Malone ... joy! Two politicians smelling an office up > for grabs ...so long as Billy Bulger does not come back from Amherst ... > I think I'll survive with my cynicism intact ... > help or hurt him, but it makes me less likely to vote for him, since > overlays seem inevitable and more logical (and I was kind of looking > forward to having two area codes in my house when we get our next > phone line!) . From what I understand, in about another ten years, we My work number is 617, my pager is 508, my cell number is 603, my home number is 207 ... multiple area codes have long ago ceased to impress me. They're more of a pain than anything else. In a small closely packed area like New England, with lots of people and state lines, I'd get used to them. > may require ANOTHER new area code or two, so either we get overlays > then, or some people are going to change their numbers twice in 10 > years (and three times in 20 years), all without moving. And? The 508/617 split started in July of 1987. I wasn't even in High School then. Seems like it had a fair life to me. Since I'm now two years out of college. As population increases and as people find they want more and more phone numbers it's inevitable that the phone system is going to have to change to support them. How is the question? Personally, if I had my druthers, I would say that we should re-do all the area codes; so that area codes are more reflective of location in the country. 0's are New England, 1's are New York ... just like Zip Codes. >> In several communities, including Newton, Watertown, Somerville, >> Charlestown and Framingham, there would actually be two area >> codes. > It's interesting to note that, with the exception of Charlestown, > where I live, all the other communities are municipalities (i.e., > cities or towns). Charlestown is a neighborhood of Boston, having In many Massachusetts communities, like the one where my parents live, the phone codes cross community lines. Waltham has a lot of codes that begin 89-, these codes are shared with Weston. There is no unique Weston codes. They are either served out of the Wellesley Central Office or the Waltham one. The reason that many of these towns may split area codes is central office locations. > been annexed in the late 19th century. It's about a mile square, with > about 15,000 residents and not an outsized business community (i.e., > not a lot of phones compared to other places) so it's hard to believe > that there is an overriding necessity to divide it in two. Can anyone > say why this division is being considered (and where)? I'm guessing > that maybe we're served by a couple of different central offices, and > the split would be made along that line. Not having the phone book in front of me so that I can look up Central Office codes, here's my guess: I'm figured since Charlestown was annexed before phone codes were really assigned, there may be no really unique Charlestown ones. (this I can confirm as soon as I go get a cup of coffee...) I would also guess that Charlestown shares switching equipment with Everett (that little finger of land up rt. 99) and Cambridge (there's a large concentration of Phones in Lechmere and Kendall); due to the bodies of water isolating it (the Charles and Mystic Rivers). So while the phone company may want to seperate Charlestown, Everett, and Cambridge, it may not be realistic based on the location of switches, without a large investment in capital. John Grossi BBN Systems and Technologies Cambridge Massachusetts ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Reaching a 500 Number Date: 26 Nov 1996 01:13:54 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , bfm@pobox.com (Barry Margolius) writes: > My company's pbx doesn't allow access to 500 numbers, so I tried my > offbrand long distance calling card (dial 800 number, enter pin, enter > number), and it fails too. I'm just curious whether this is the norm. > Do most of you find that you cannot reach area code 500 numbers with a > calling card? Apparently not all telco LDs interoperate. To be sure it works, use the same telco as the 500-subscriber (usually AT&T, the prefix tells the story). 800-321 0288 or 800-CALL ATT works, and you can PROBABLY use the card for another telco, at least local Bell companies (Get one from your local phone co). Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 96 17:27 EST Subject: Re: Reaching a 500 Number Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Do most of you find that you cannot reach area code 500 numbers with a > calling card? 500 numbers are carrier specific. If your carrier doesn't happen to be the one that runs the number in question, it physically can't complete the call unless it takes pity on you and dumps the call out to a POTS line to hand to the other carrier. There's a fairly simple problem with 500 numbers: they are exactly the same as 900 numbers except that the nominal use is different (you're unlikely to get someone who'll talk dirty to you unless you happen to use it to call your spouse) and so far people don't seem to have noticed that you can charge any amount you want for them. Yes, most of them cost no more than 25 cents/min, but if your POTS calls are otherwise 10 cents/min, that's not much of a bargain. If you're a big company with direct trunk access and you're paying 6 or 7 cents for POTS, it's really no bargain. For 500 numbers to be really useful, the IXCs would have to come up with a mutual exchange arrangement so any IXC could handle a call to any 500 number and charge the caller the POTS rate. But it ain't gonna happen. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Reaching a 500 Number Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 21:56:47 -0800 In article , bfm@pobox.com (Barry Margolius) wrote: > My company's pbx doesn't allow access to 500 numbers, so I tried my > offbrand long distance calling card (dial 800 number, enter pin, enter > number), and it fails too. I'm just curious whether this is the norm. > Do most of you find that you cannot reach area code 500 numbers with a > calling card? Yes, the situation you found is the norm. Each '500' number is specific to the long-distance company that carries it -- the person whose '500' number you are dialing picks the company; you get no say in the matter. Thus, if you try to use Telco A to call a number carried by Telco B, you will fail. You should be able to reach AT&T '500' numbers by using AT&T's 800-number access and an AT&T calling card (or other card they accept), and similarly with other carriers. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 09:55:41 -0500 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Numbers) nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) wrote: >> You can also pick a vanity number, if it is an available >> number in the list of 500-NXX assigned to AT&T (there is no 500 number >> portability yet). > I do not believe portability is in the cards. Each LD operator OWNS > certains prefixes. AT&T owns a bunch, about 30 or so last I > checked. For obvious reasons, 288 is one of them. Your conclusion about portability not being in the cards is a non-sequitur. The whole point of portability is to shrink the carrier-binding granularity down from a whole prefix (block of 10,000 numbers) to a single number. This is exactly what happened a few years ago with 800 numbers; prior to that time, each 800-NXX was assigned to a single carrier. If portability can be introduced for 800, it can eventually be introduced for 500 as well. > Most carriers seem to inter-operate, but note that when you dial a 500 > number, the carrier is whoever owns the prefix, NOT the carrier you have > chosen by default or design (10xxxx etc may be accepted by the system, but > your call is processed by the prefix owner regardsless.) Again, the same applies to 800/888 calls, but that has not proved a barrier to portability in those spaces. If a carrier lookup database can work for 800/888, it can work for any NPA or pseudo-NPA. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But you have never yet seen any attempt at portability for 700 numbers have you? Although 500/700 numbers can certainly be handled the same way (portability) I do not think it will ever happen with those two categories. PAT] ------------------------------ From: simg@netcom.com Subject: Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Numbers) Organization: SimGraphics Engineering, South Pasadena, California Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 01:24:17 GMT > least not from outside the NANP. (A telco adept can use USA Direct numbers > from a foreign country, but requires that he knows how and has either US > Telco credit card or your four digit pin.) > Another great idea that _almost_ worked. Furthermore, Even not all USA Direct numbers are accepting 0+500 & PIN calls. Most of English language USA Direct lines do accept them most of the time. I have yet to find an European country where "In Language" USA Direct numbers accept reverse billing 500 numbers. My trouble ticket with AT&T about this problem is still open. To add insult to injury, even AT&T operators frequently don't know about the existence of 500 numbers, believing that such an area code doesn't exist. They offer to make an operator assisted collect call :-/. On the positive side, dealing with AT&T customer service for True Connections and USA Direct was relatively painless. Nothing can compare to the insults and condescence you hear from everyone when you switch your local phone service to MCI Metro. But it's a different story. Sylvester ------------------------------ From: raptor1@ptd.net Subject: Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers in BA Territory! Date: 25 Nov 96 16:12:02 GMT Organization: ProLog - PenTeleData, Inc. On 21 Nov 1996 22:21:48 GMT, mitch@alberts.com wrote: > I had a similar experience yesterday. What a surprise! A voice reading > the telephone number (that called me) to me. The call was from my > office to my home, which happens to be over an areacode boundry > (215 - 610) but within Bell Atlantic territory. > This seems NOT to happen when the call originated from the same areacode. > Could it be that they are trying to address the "automagic" return of a > toll call with this new feature? I wish they would give the number for > ALL calls ... I'm smack dab in the middle of 717 AC, and all my *69s are coming back with the calling number announced by the voice. This includes calls originating within 717, 215, 610, 201, 212. Even more interesting, it is giving ID on calls placed from a local independent telco, Commonwealth Telephone Co. *69 never worked with those exchanges before. Nothing doing on cellular. George ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Date: 26 Nov 1996 01:13:52 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , Davew@cris.com (Dave Harrison) writes: > He said the commission's aim is "to stop (Zundel's) signal if we > can. It's not all that easy, but that would be our intention, to stop > him from doing that (posting material on the web). This is truly a nasty precedent. (Never mind how odious this guy might be.) The whole point of phone lines and of internet is that it is a common carrier. You do not require the phone company to block access to people that they find objectionable. Requiring the filtering of access is morally bankrupt and technically difficult, but unfortunately _just_ possible. The next step is to hold the ISPs and the telcos liable (criminally or civilly) if false or misleading info is being given to somebody over their lines. Result: Chaos. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: mexitech@netcom.com Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 01:22:27 GMT Dave Harrison (Davew@cris.com) wrote: > OTTAWA (ITN) * In an unprecedented move, the Canadian Human Rights > Commission has ordered hearings into complaints that Holocaust denier > Ernst Zundel is promoting hatred on the Internet. > Commission head Max Yalden said Friday he believes the commission > has the jurisdiction to shut down Zundel's Web site, even though it's > based at a Web server in California. > "The signal's being picked up here, and where it's originating > doesn't make any difference," Yalden said. That would be an interesting bit of legal fighting. Love to see it. And maybe next Mr. Yalden can go after any Ford owners out there posting propaganda about how Fords are better than Chevies. As an example of course. > There is no technical way for Canadian Internet companies to block > Zundel's site, but Yalden said the commission has jurisdiction over > telephonic communications and Internet messages are transmitted over > telephone lines. You know, it could possibly be done, given the right scenario. 1. Clinton demands manufactoring and software give encoding key to a government escrow account. No secrets from Uncle! 2. Canada demands that Nortel do same in retaliation for every switch shipped, same same, Newbridge, etc. Next thing you know, we got tek wars. Patrick mexitech@netcom.com Moderation is a fatal thing, Nothing succeeds like excess! -Oscar Wilde ------------------------------ From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: Someone Attempting to Bill Calls to my Number Date: 25 Nov 1996 15:38:34 -0500 Organization: InfiNet Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com In article , Michael D Adams wrote: > I just got back from a weekend trip out of town, to discover a rather > disturbing sequence of messages on my answering machine. ..... > Also, just out of curiosity, is it possible in this situation that someone > could manage to get the call billed to my phone number, even though I did > not "press one or say 'yes' now ..."? Possibly. A well-known scam is to find people with answering machines who have not changed their remote code from the factory installed code. They then change the remote message to "Yes Yes Yes " And then place a bill to third party call to that answering machine which promptly answers : Yes Yes ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... 'Billed Number Screening' Good idea, but first change the remote access codes! Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #634 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Nov 26 12:13:22 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA06495; Tue, 26 Nov 1996 12:13:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 12:13:22 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611261713.MAA06495@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #635 TELECOM Digest Tue, 26 Nov 96 12:13:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 635 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson US Cellular Blows It - Complaints Filed (Finally!) (Stanley Cline) Atlanta BellSouth Mobility and Caller ID (Stanley Cline) Fiber-Optic/Problem w 28.8kb Modems? (Joel Raskin) Cocots in Las Vegas (Meyer Toole) Experience With GE Capital ResCom (po@welchlink.wlch.jhu.edu) Ascend Pipeline 130 Routers (Jim Craig) Re: Freemark Free Email Service - Advertisers Pay (Glen Ecklund) Re: Another Free E-Mail With Advertising Site (Tom Betz) Re: Another Free E-Mail With Advertising Site (lr@access2.digex.net) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Ed Ellers) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Stanley Cline) Re: Integretel Again (Nils Andersson) Re: New Dial-a-Porn Country Sighted (Nils Andersson) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: US Cellular Blows It - Complaints Filed (Finally!) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 01:50:26 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com As most of you know, I have had an ongoing battle with United States Cellular for several months because of their "decision" to not cover the Polk County, Tennessee area (where Olympic kayaking was held, among other things), while still advertising this area as "covered" in its coverage maps and having a listing in the Polk County phone book, as well as persistent roaming problems (call delivery failures, overcharges, charges for "free" calls, etc.) Well, they STILL have not answered my REPEATED letters, phone calls, and faxes; they have ignored strong, vocal complaints from BellSouth Mobility and others (they lied to the Atlanta Olympic committee, too) as well. Seeing that USCC is OBVIOUSLY deceiving the public (advertising coverage where none exists) and does NOT want to handle any complaints or inquiries brought to its attention, I have decided to file complaints with the FCC and Tennessee Attorney General. (The complaints run about 15 pages in length -- they include copies of pertinent USCC "coverage" maps and the offensive Polk County phone book page, as well as all letters/faxes sent to USCC and selected Digest and a.c-p-t posts I have made about USCC.) Worse, I can't roam on the "A-side" in Ocoee anymore -- the roaming service -- American Roaming Network -- that handles "unregistered" roamers for CellularOne/GTE has strangely stopped accepting *my* BellSouth calling card (which works everywhere else; my parents' calling card DOES work with them -- neither ARN nor GTE nor BellSouth has any explanation for this); they also no longer accept Visa cards (they SAY that "Visa dropped contracts with telecommunications providers" -- this is almost definitely a lie since Cellular Express, AT&T, and MCI *all* have *no* problems with my -- or anyone else's -- Visa cards!) If I find out US Cellular has *anything* to do with this "denial of service" -- which I believe they DO, I *WILL* SUE THEM! I'm probably terminating my service with BellSouth Mobility in protest (I dropped CellOne "again" about a month ago for financial reasons) -- I'll just wait for ATTWS or Powertel PCS to come to Chattanooga before bothering with wireless again. (They probably won't have coverage in Polk County for awhile, but I probably won't care then, either.) US Cellular DEFINITELY sucks, that's for sure. I have had it ONCE AND FOR ALL with their complete, utter stupidity. (If anyone wants to propose a newsgroup -- alt.cellular.roaming or alt.cellular.uscc-sucks, maybe -- to discuss this, let me know.) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Atlanta BellSouth Mobility and Caller ID Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 01:50:22 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com Atlanta BellSouth Mobility has apparently implemented outward "cellular caller ID delivery" -- although with some quirks: I was down in the Atlanta area today and called someone in the Atlanta area -- when I called them, my number (423-xxx-xxxx) and "CHATTANOOGA, TN" (terminating switch couldn't resolve name for my cellular number, of course, so it used ratecenter instead) showed up on their caller ID box! Never mind I was ROAMING in the Atlanta system at the time! (Apparently the switch takes the MIN and converts it to CID.) However, they are also (apparently) passing CID as "ANI" which causes interesting behavior with 800 numbers: * Last month, I had a call on my VoiceNet calling card bill that showed "to" somewhere "from" MY CELLULAR NUMBER (not the trunk numbers that normally show up.) I didn't think anything of it until today, when ... * I called AT&T's customer service number (800-222-0300) and instead of getting a trunk number read back -- it read back my CELLULAR NUMBER! (This readback is based on *ANI*, NOT *CID*, as I ALWAYS get "trunk" numbers read back when calling from a PBX that DOES pass CID!) * BUT ... Calling my home number using 1-800-CALL-ATT, which NORMALLY passes CID, only resulted in an "out of area" message on my Caller ID box. I would suspect that what they're sending out on 800 calls will make for some interesting bills (people having 800 or calling card calls from roamers rated from the caller's "home" city rather than ATLANTA as should be the case, etc.) The CID information is *not* sent out on long-distance calls (which are routed by default to Sprint), but *is* on the local trunks (which also carry 800/888 calls.) Also, *67 apparently causes "out of area" rather than "anonymous"/"private", too. In addition, BellSouth has decided to *block* access to operators for intraLATA calls -- when in the Atlanta system, dialing 0+NPA+NXX-XXXX, or even 10XXX+0+NPA+NXX-XXXX, results in the call being *completed* as if *1* were dialed! (Apparently, this was implemented to prevent people from using LEC calling cards to call Newnan, which is local on BellSouth landline from Atlanta but isn't on BellSouth Mobility, as "untimed" calls. But it affects ALL intraLATA calls -- whether INSIDE the ATL local calling area, the BellSouth Mobility local calling area, or even if long distance from both Atlanta and BellSouth Mobility (Columbus, La Grange, etc.) In my view, this is unacceptable. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: raskinj@pobox.com (Joel Raskin) Subject: Fiber-Optic/Problem w 28.8kb Modems? Date: Mon, 25 Nov 96 21:59:04 GMT Organization: Zippo News - www.zippo.com Hi, I've never achieved a 28.8 connection with any of my computers/modems from at home, although I do get 28.8k connections when I use my laptop in the office. The connect speeds at home are typically within the 19,200 - 21,600 range (with an occasional connection at 24,000). I've also been experiencing an increase in the frequency of disconnects with my primary ISP -- but only calling from home -- and only that ISP. A NYNEX technician checked my lines (this happens on all three lines) and found no problems. When we finally communicated such that he understood the problem ... I don't hear noise (static or hum) on my voice calls, but my data connections are not what they should be, he said the problem lies with the fiber optic cabling in my building -- that it's not compatible with modems faster than 14.4k. About two years ago, I noticed a degredation in the "sound" of my dial tones on all three lines and I called the phone company to inquire. THey told me they had converted the lines to fiber optic (I think the lines from the main trunk into the building -- or from the CO to the building) and the change in sound was the result. At that time, I did not have 28.8k modems so I can't say whether or not I had better connections prior to that. Does this diagnosis of the problem sound plausible? I had always thought that fiber-optic was an improvement over copper and would provide a better connection? I'm surprised to hear this being used to explain why something won't work correctly. ___ __ __ | Email: raskinj@pobox.com | | | |_ | |--------------------------------------- |_| |__| |__ |__ | Web: http://www.pobox.com/~raskinj ------------------------------ From: meyer@idirect.com (Meyer Toole) Subject: Cocots in Las Vegas Date: 25 Nov 96 19:38:35 UTC I was in Las Vegas for Comdex last week, and noticed mosts hotel/casinos now use "no-name" providers. You cannot call 10288. 800 numbers cost 90 or 95 cents depending on the company. Poor operator service as well. (And little sympathy.) Stop on by the Internet TeleCafe! telnet://telecafe.com:9000 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Las Vegas is in general a rip-off town. What you are saying is not surprising at all; it is the norm there. Be glad you don't have to live there all the time. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 12:46:26 -0500 From: po@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu Subject: Experience With GE Capital ResCom Organization: JHU Hello, Have you ever heard about GE-Capital ResCom? It seems to be affiliated with General Electric, and resells telephone service. Currently it seems limit their service to apartment communities. Here is a story of my experience with this ResCom (stands for Resell Company?). Shortly after I moved into an apartment community in the suburbs of Baltimore, a guy from ResCom was trying to pursuade me to switch my LOCAL phone service to ResCom. By that time I've already opened my account with Bell Atlantic (local) and MCI (long distance). But the pursuader from ResCom promised a free transfer and lower monthly fee. So I switched to ResCom. After two to three months I lived with ResCom, here comes the first bill with long distance calls. And for the first time I realized that ResCom switched my long distance carrier to ResCom WITHOUT asking anything from me and WITHOUT even notifying me. Their rate for international calls are up to three times the rate of MCI. I called them (can not count how many times) to dispute the bill. I explained so many times I did not want them to switch my long distance servece to ResCom. One of the agent said ResCom does not allow other long distance carrier to serve its customers! I tried to read the agreement of to her. It does not say this at all. She apologized and said it's their mistake to not let me know this. My issue was left to billing research team (I was not allowed to talk with the researchers directly). I got the answer from the research team. They would not adjust my bill. The reason is their rate was correct. They offered me a plan, with $3 monthly fee and 65 cents per minute international call. Sounds so good. Can I trust it again? Can I accept it again? It sounds the same sweet a deal when they persuaded me to switch my LOCAL providers. I decided to switch back to Bell Atlantic. The recent bill showed that ResCom even put a financial charge on the disputed amount I have not paid, and the $3 dollar "beneficial plan" premium up to Dec. even I stopped with them in early November. This makes me feel very bad as if I was caught by a scam. I lost at least $200 in this. Plus the $50 coupon I got from MCI as a welcome to this community, and void by ResCom. Not to say the frustration from this experience. The lesson is never take something too good to be true. And for GE-ResCom, it up to you whether you will take the chance when it is your turn. I just can not believe they are affiliated with GE, a company with high reputation. Especially if you are living in an apartment community, you might have more odds to encounter them. Your advice and your sharing of experiences are appreciated. Paul ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 09:32:35 -0600 From: Jim Craig Reply-To: jcraig@specent.com Organization: Craig Consulting and Technology, Inc. Subject: Ascend Pipeline 130 Routers Ascend has proven to me that they are one of the few companies in the high-tech world that really gives a damn about their customers! I sold one of my clients six Pipeline 130 routers to replace their old Lan2Lan routers. They were at an excellent price and offered T-1 and ISDN connections. The problem was that I never could get them to work right. I emailed Ascend and THE NEXT DAY I got calls from several people at Ascend offering assistance (two from VP level executives!). They even offered to fly in a technician to help!! The problem ended up being SOUTHWESTERN BELL'S FAULT. They are unable to provide T-1 lines in my area that are compatible with the Pipeline 130's (at least that's what Bell said). Now here comes the REALLY impressive part. Ascend is going to take back the routers and give me a refund!! Even though the problem is not with their product, they are going the extra mile. You just don't see that very much in this industry. I would highly recommend Ascend products to those of you considering network routers. If you'd like to know the details of what kinds of lines will and won't work with the Pipeline 130's email me at jcraig@specent.com. ------------------------------ From: glen@scooter.heurikon.com (Glen Ecklund) Subject: Re: Freemark Free Email Service - Advertisers Pay Date: 26 Nov 96 15:18:34 GMT Organization: Heurikon Corporation > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now as I have said in the past, I am > a little suspicious of all these things, **but** this does not seem > like a half-bad program for people who send a large volume of email > they otherwise have to pay for and who do not mind reading advertising > in the process. This certainly would be for advertisers a far more > legitimate way of using the net than all the junk email we see now. > If anyone wants to try it out and make a report, I certainly know the > readers will want to see it. And if you want to try advertising with > them (or finding out more details about the advertising program) then > call them at 617-492-6600 and please report on that also. PAT] I got Freemark accounts for my family. Actually, I got Juno first, before Freemark was available, but never used it much. In both services, ads are selected for you according to your consumer profile, which you enter when you sign up. In Juno, I think you can change your profile later. In Freemark, I don't think you can. I see lots of ads for Lifesavers and PC magazines. The ad space takes up part of the screen, of course, so the space for email is smaller than I like, but I'm used to a big Sun screen. I set up accounts on Juno on a friend's PC, because we didn't have a Windows machine at home at that time. I was disappointed not to be able to get the email names I wanted, because they were already taken. The Freemark disk arrived about the same time that we got a new PC at home, so I tried it out, and found that I could get most of the email names I wanted. Unfortunately, I couldn't get "glen@freemark.com" for myself, but I don't expect to use my Freemark account much anyway, since I use my work account. On Juno, when I asked for the name "glen", it said that it was taken, and offered me something like "glen3", allowed me to accept it or request something else. I then tried my last name, with a similar result. On Freemark, if the name you request is already taken, it tacks a number on the end without asking your consent. So I got "glen4", which I don't like, and won't use. I then started over, and had to go through the whole consumer questionare, and got "ecklund". I have reported several small bugs in the Freemark software. The biggest one I don't think I have yet reported. You can turn line-wrap on or off. When it is on, it not only wraps lines on mail you write, it also concatenates and wraps lines on mail you receive. This does awful things to quoted excerpts of previous email. I haven't experimented with it sufficiently to be sure of the details. The other annoying thing is that downloading your mail takes a long time, due to the picture ad that gets downloaded with each piece of email. Actually, two picture ads. A small one is displayed with the mail. Click on it for more details, and you see a full-screen ad (at least in some cases). Freemark does have a policy against abuses of email. They don't want to be blacklisted, I'm sure, as one of the big ISPs does to spam sites. I don't know how vigorously they enforce their policy. Something I requested, but I don't know whether they would want to do, is to be able to download email to everyone in the household in one operation. I think this would be much less tedious than doing each person separately, as is required now. For this reason, I got my parents a joint account. I don't know whether my mother would use it anyway, and it is even more unpleasant to have to keep checking an account that never gets any mail. Glen Ecklund Email: glen@heurikon.com Heurikon Corporation Phone: 608-831-5500 8310 Excelsior Drive FAX: 608-831-8844 Madison, WI 53717 USA http://www.heurikon.com ------------------------------ From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: Another Free E-Mail With Advertising Site Date: 25 Nov 1996 13:35:35 -0500 Organization: Society for the Elimination of Unsolicited Commercial Email Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com Quoth sbills@juno.com (Steven P Bills) in : > Your readers may want to know about another free e-mail > service. I have been using this service for about four months and am > absolutely thrilled by it! The ads come up on a small window above > my e-mail, and if I am interested in what I see, I can click on it to > see more. All ads are from reputable companies, and only reflect > items you personally may be interested in. Best of all, if there is > no local number, you can call an 800 number from anywhere. You can > contact Juno at (800)654-JUNO. Your readers may also want to know that JUNO is a frequent source or email drop-box for email spam. As a result, MANY people do as I do; I autobounce any email coming from the juno.com domain. This means that juno.com users are cut off from a significant part of the Internet. Please note, I do not blame Juno admins for this problem; being a free service, it's just a natural place for email spammers to abuse. I autobounce them because of volume, not because of the system's intent. Tom Betz (914) 375-1510 Want to send me email? First, read this page: ------------------------------ From: lr@access2.digex.net Subject: Re: Another Free E-Mail With Advertising Site Date: 25 Nov 1996 18:50:26 GMT Organization: Intentionally Left Blank Steven P Bills (sbills@juno.com) wrote: > Your readers may want to know about another free e-mail > service. I have been using this service for about four months and am > absolutely thrilled by it! The ads come up on a small window above > my e-mail, and if I am interested in what I see, I can click on it to > see more. All ads are from reputable companies, and only reflect > items you personally may be interested in. Best of all, if there is > no local number, you can call an 800 number from anywhere. You can > contact Juno at (800) 654-JUNO. What I do know is that I got spammed royally by JUNO customers this morning. Thanks for the 800 number, now I can run up your phone bill complaining about them. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A lot of spam I see here (must have been a slow day; I only got five chain letters and Make Money Fast deals today; maybe it is because of being a holiday week) originates out of Juno now that I go back and look at some of the headers, etc. So, make a note of the number: 800-654-JUNO (5866). If you feel they need counseling from time to time, I know you are up to the task. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 01:51:55 -0500 Organization: Mikrotec Internet Services, Inc. (MISNet) mreiney@hevanet.com wrote: > I wonder what breakfast cereal would cost if the cost of competition > (mostly advertising) was zero. It would cost as much as the manufacturer could get away with charging. The benefit of competition is that it helps strike a balance between good profits and low prices. ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 01:50:36 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com On Sun, 17 Nov 1996 19:41:42 +0000, John Stahl wrote: > Here is Mr. Pluckett's outline of the latest FCC plans to deregulate > the payphone market: > The FCC also ruled that, in markets with Intralata Presubscription, > intralata traffic cannot be assigned to the LEC. The ruling also Until LECs have *working* PIC codes for intraLATA calls, or at the VERY least 800/888 access numbers, this had better NOT happen! It is bad enough going to a COCOT and being unable to reach the LEC (while still being able to reach all other carriers) -- if "ex-" LEC phones *also* cut off the LEC, intraLATA 0+ calling rates will go UP dramatically! (IXCs charge more than the LEC in most areas for intraLATA 0+ calls; AOSs are even *worse* -- as much as $7/call surcharge from an AOS, while just 50c from the LEC!) > appears to impact independent telephone company payphones by requiring > presubscription on all payphones. Previously, independent telephone What about independents that *still* do not have equal access, where NO carrier other than AT&T is available? (Yes, there are places like this around -- mainly very small LECs that have either steppers or very old ESS/DCO switches.) How does an independent presubscribe a payphone when the only IXC available is AT&T?! > the payphone providers and/or the LECs are going to increase their > basic rates in order to cover these additional costs! The LECs aren't the problem here -- it's (most) COCOT owners! The non-LEC payphone providers will not only cover "costs" -- "charges" will probably go up to unreasonable levels ... meaning more in their pockets and less in pockets of the payphone-using public. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Integretel Again Date: 25 Nov 1996 19:34:03 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , Martin McCormick writes: > My wife later said that she saw the Integretel sticker on the > phone and thought that by using our AT&T calling card she would bypass > any unusual charges. Now she knows that all that happens in such a case > is that your calling card number gets billed at the rip-off rate rather > than a normal one. Yup! At least typically, the telco charge card is just that (think of it as a VISA card), and has nothing to do with which carrier you get. (There may be some oddball exceptions to this rule, please post!) What you need to do is to either dial the 10-xxx (xxx=288 for AT&T, 222 for MCI, 333 for Sprint, lots of others) before you dial the 0-xxx-xxx-xxxx or 1-xxx-xxx-xxxx, or more foolproof, 1-800-CALL ATT or 1-800-321 0288, other long distance companies have other 800-numbers. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: New Dial-a-Porn Country Sighted Date: 26 Nov 1996 01:13:55 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: > "This is a call to Georgia. It could be quite expensive. Please hang > up now if you are not willing to pay the charges ..." > And how many folks are going to realize *which* Georgia is meant? > Especially if the recording has a Southern accent. > Pure speculation, but you *really* have to wonder. I tried to post before but it got lost somewhere. Anyway, I have seen a number of dialaporn countries, includin Chile country code and country codes beginning with 2, indicating Africa (NOT 29x). About a year ago, I actually dialed the "Chile" number, and got some bozo fielding calls for "the chat line". I asked him about billing and Chile etc, but might as well have been talking to a computer, the only thing he knew was to ask me if I wanted to join his chat line. The "Africa" format I saw last week was 011-2xx-xxx-xxxx. What is going on here? Regards, Nils Andersson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think what was mentioned here once some time ago was that those chat line operators are not necessarily in the country implied by the code. They can be anywhere, and just 'borrow' the code, having calls re-routed to them. Comments on this anyone? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #635 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 27 18:28:27 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id SAA28849; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 18:28:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 18:28:27 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611272328.SAA28849@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #636 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Nov 96 18:28:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 636 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Searching Tool Available in Telecom Archives (TELECOM Digest Editor) BellSouth Mobility DCS Customers Can Use Digital Mobile Phones (Mike King) Pacific Bell Mobile Services Expands PCS Coverage (Mike King) FAQ on Network Congestion (Christophe Vermeulen) FCC to Allow Negotiation of International Tariffs (oldbear@arctos.com) PUC Keeps Burbank, Glendale in 818 (Tad Cook) Calling Cards Acquire Cachet (Tad Cook) List of Exchanges Involved in the 317/765 Split (John Cropper) ITU-T G.825 Questions (Kevin D. Drucker) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 27 Nov 1996 13:12:05 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: New Searching Tool Available in Telecom Archives Digest reader David Sorkin has kindly provided me with some ideas and suggestions for readers who wish to search through old messages in the Telecom Archives, and I have installed a script to do that for your convenience. Actually what it does is searches comp.dcom.telecom via either Deja News or a similar service called Reference.com. To make the search as easy as possible, the scripts I have installed set certain defaults of those services to comp.dcom.telecom. In the case of Deja News, as part of the search string you may include searching only for author using '~a authorname' or search only for subject using '~s subjectname' if desired. If you do not use one of these qualifiers (~a or ~s) then whatever you enter as your search string will be checked against the entire body of the message base including the text as well as the subject/author. You also need to indicate if you want to check the current (last two or thre months) database or if you want the older database. Reference.com works a little differently, and links have been provided to help files for both services. Note this is *not* searching the Telecom Archives; it is searching the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup which is almost the same, except the search will only be covering our 'back.issues' files (which would be the same as old c.d.t. messages). The various special reports and additional files in the archives will not be located by these searches. You should for now continue to review the archives indexes to learn about those files. You can reach this searching service one of two ways: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/search.html will take you directly to that page to search; you can also go from that page through a link back to the archives itself. http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives will take you to the Telecom Archives home page, where one selection (of the many choices available) is to search old messages in the newsgroup. And don't forget that the most recent (usually around seven to eight hundred messages over the past month) messages can also be located in TELECOM_Digest_Online, where you can sort by author, subject, date or thread. You reach that URL by entering: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/TELECOM_Digest_Online I hope this new link will prove useful in searching the older messages for this group. Remember, the search is of comp.dcom.telecom rather than the Telecom Archives back issues files, but for all intents and purposes these are the same thing. Thanks again to David Sorkin for his help on this project. Patrick Townson TELECOM Digest Editor ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Mobility DCS Customers Can Use Digital Mobile Phones Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:02:31 PST ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:51:07 -0500 (EST) From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH MOBILITY DCS CUSTOMERS CAN USE DIGITAL MOBILE PHONES BellSouth Mobility DCS Customers Can Now Use Digital Mobile Phones in Major Cities Across U.S. Company Offers Roaming at 45 Cents Per Minute Nationwide ATLANTA, GA, November 26, 1996 BellSouth Mobility DCS customers can now take their DCS phones with them while traveling outside the Carolinas and Eastern Tennessee and pay one low per minute rate of 45 cents for local calls. The company announced today that its customers can now use their DCS phones when traveling to cities where Omnipoint Communications, Inc., Pacific Bell Mobile Systems, and Western Wireless operate digital wireless communications networks also utilizing the GSM technology standard. Those cities include New York City and Newark, New Jersey; San Diego, California; and Honolulu, Hawaii. "Our customers already have the benefit of a large regional service area where they pay a low per minute rate for all calls," said Eric Ensor, president of BellSouth Mobility DCS. "Through our agreements with other GSM companies, we are now able to offer our customers the freedom to travel outside of the Carolinas and Eastern Tennessee and use their DCS phones for only 45 cents per minute a savings of up to 50 percent over current cellular roaming rates." When using their phones outside of the DCS region, customers simply make and receive calls just as they do at home, with no special codes to remember. Customers will automatically receive calls while traveling in any of these cities as long as their phone is turned on. Otherwise callers will be able to leave a voice mail that customers can retrieve at their convenience. "Now our customers can count on the quality, clarity and security of an all-digital network that they have come to expect in our region when traveling to other cities," added Ensor. "This is just the beginning of what will become a nationwide network in the coming months." Customers will be able to use their phones in other cities as additional GSM digital networks come on line. Cities that will be added in the first part of 1997 include Jackson and Memphis, Tennessee; Anniston, Birmingham, Dothan, Florence, Gadsden, Huntsville, Montgomery and Tuscaloosa, Alabama; Gainesville, Jacksonville, Panama City, St. Augustine, Tallahassee, Tampa and Orlando, Florida; Jackson, Meridian, and Tupelo, Mississippi; Brunswick, Georgia; Washington, D.C.; Baltimore and surrounding areas of Maryland, as well as parts of Virginia; Los Angeles and San Francisco, California; Denver, Colorado; Dallas and Houston, Texas; Detroit, Michigan; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Portland, Oregon; Salt Lake City, Utah; Albuquerque and Santa Fe, New Mexico; Las Vegas, Nevada; Hilo, Hawaii; and Western Wisconsin. BellSouth Mobility DCS launched its digital communications service in July 1996 in an area of more than 12 million people. The company is a subsidiary of BellSouth Corporation, the world's wireless leader. The company operates its digital communications network in Eastern Tennessee; and in the Carolinas with partners DukeNet, a subsidiary of Duke Power; CaroNet, a subsidiary of Carolina Power & Light; and 30 independent telephone companies. BellSouth Corporation is a $17.9 billion communications company providing telecommunications, wireless communications, directory advertising and publishing, and information services to more than 25 million customers in 17 countries worldwide. ### Note: For more information, visit the BellSouth Mobility DCS Web Site at: http://www.bellsouthdcs.com For Information Contact: Kristie Madara, BellSouth Mobility DCS, (404)841-2074 Andy Hagedon, GCI/Atlanta, (404)870-3829 ------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: Pacific Bell Mobile Services Expands PCS Coverage Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 08:42:16 PST ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 14:36:34 -0800 From: sqlgate@sf-ptg-fw.pactel.com Subject: Pacific Bell Mobile Services Expands PCS Coverage FOR MORE INFORMATION: Linda Bonniksen (213) 975-5061 Pacific Bell Mobile Services Expands PCS Coverage San Diegans to Roam Free in World's Fastest-Growing Wireless Network; Company Pursues Ambitious Launch Schedule PLEASANTON, Calif. -- Pacific Bell Mobile Services (PBMS) has expanded the reach of its new PCS network so that the company's San Diego-area subscribers can use their 100 percent pure digital wireless phones in several U.S. markets, including Orange County. To promote the expanded coverage area, Pacific Bell Mobile Services will waive so-called roaming charges. For the next six months starting Nov. 29, San Diegans traveling in Orange County and Las Vegas can use their PCS phones to call--or be called by -- anyone in the world without paying roaming fees. Through the end of 1996, they can roam free of charge in New York City, Honolulu, Portland, Ore., Salt Lake City, Utah, Knoxville, Tenn., and Charlotte and the Raleigh/Durham area in North Carolina. "This is an early holiday gift to our San Diego customers, as well as a sneak preview of the rapidly expanding availability of PCS in California and across the United States," said Terrence Valeski, vice president of marketing and business development for Pacific Bell Mobile Services. "PCS is sweeping across the state and the nation faster than most people ever expected." During the free roaming promotion, people who place PCS calls will pay the same airtime and long-distance charges they enjoy in San Diego. PBMS Plans to Cover California, Nevada by Mid-1997 Valeski said the company is determined to make PCS available throughout California and Nevada in less than a year, adding that it took the cellular industry nearly a decade to reach the level of wireless coverage that Pacific Bell Mobile Services will offer by mid-1997. "The 12-year wait for an alternative to cellular is nearly over," he said. "My advice to consumers is to hold on a few more weeks until PBMS brings wireless competition to your town." PBMS introduced 100 percent pure digital PCS in San Diego on Nov. 1. Unlike existing cellular networks or analog/digital cellular hybrids, the company's pure digital PCS offers the wireless equivalent of residential telephone service, no static or cross-talk, fewer dropped calls and unprecedented protection from eavesdropping and cloning. The phones, which feature a built-in pager and answering machine, are available as an off-the-shelf retail product in more than 120 San Diego-area stores, including Circuit City, Computer City, Good Guys, Incredible Universe, K-Mart, Longs Drugs, Office Depot, Sears and Staples. PBMS has eliminated gimmicky one-cent or free phone promotions that tie customer to expensive long-term contracts. Calling plans start as low as $19.95 a month, plus a per-minute airtime charge. Each plan includes some free minutes of airtime. Furthermore, the first minute on all incoming calls is free. Long distance calls cost 15 cents a minute plus airtime to anywhere in the United States, any time of the day. The calling plans include extra features such as call waiting, call forward, call hold and conference calling at no charge. Pacific Bell Mobile Services is the wireless communications subsidiary of Pacific Bell. Pacific Telesis Group, the parent company of Pacific Bell and Pacific Bell Mobile Services, is a diversified telecommunications company headquartered in San Francisco. ------------------ Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: cver@rc.bel.alcatel.be (Christophe Vermeulen) Subject: FAQ on Network Congestion Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:17:40 GMT Organization: Alcatel Bell DS9 Is there somewhere a FAQ about the latest network congestions experienced in the telephone network due to long-duration local calls of Internet Surfers ? I'm more precisely looking for figures and references about it. I heard of 16% blocked call attempts in California, but no source was mentioned (Wall Street Journal ?) Also, the different configurations of telephone networks have an effect on the likely solutions : if you have a remote access unit that makes already the concentration, you can't IMO solve the problem by installing an overlay network in the local exchange (since the problem is beyong the exchange already). Wrong ? Regards, Christophe Vermeulen Project Leader On-line Services Alcatel Bell, Research Division DS9 Fr. Wellesplein 1 - B-2018 Antwerp - Belgium Phone: +32 3 240 8942 - Fax: +32 3 240 9932 Email: cver@rc.bel.alcatel.be CompuServe: 106022,2160 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 11:08:20 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: FCC to Allow Negotiation of International Tariffs FCC DOES "TWO-STEP" DANCE AGAINST PRICING CARTEL The Federal Communications Commission will issue an order intended to bring international phone rates closer to actual phone-company costs. Foreign telephone companies currently charge U.S. phone companies fees, which on average are 50% higher than cost. The FCC plans to let American companies negotiate fees with foreign carriers rather than rely on the present system of government tariff agreements -- but permission to negotiate will be granted only if the FCC determines that the foreign carrier's country is open to competition. FCC Chairman Reed Hundt says the order is "the first step in a two-step dance we're doing that we hope will celebrate the end of the international telephone pricing cartel." Next month the Commission plans to set "benchmark" limits on what U.S. companies will pay foreign carriers to complete calls. source: Washington Post November 26, 1996 ------------------------------ Subject: PUC Keeps Burbank, Glendale in 818 Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 23:39:06 PST From: tad@ssc.com PUC Keeps Burbank, Glendale in 818 Area SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The cities of Burbank and Glendale can stay in the 818 area code next June when communities east of them will be placed in a new 626 area code, the state Public Utilities Commission decided Tuesday. The commission approved changes in the boundaries originally proposed by telephone companies and a statewide administrator. The area code split is one of several now taking place throughout California because a proliferation of phone lines serving pagers and fax machines is using up the available numbers. The PUC granted requests by Burbank and Glendale to remain in the 818 telephone area that covers the San Fernando Valley. Officials of the two cities said they have stronger economic and community ties with the San Fernando Valley than with the San Gabriel Valley, which will be in the 626 area. The boundary shift approved by the commission also keeps La Crescenta and La Canada in the 818 area, which will extend to the western border of Pasadena. However, a request by Monterey Park to stay in 818 was rejected. Monterey Park officials said the city's large Chinese-American community traditionally associates the number 8 with prosperity but considers 626 unlucky. The city also said callers would confuse 626 with the 562 area code that is planned soon for some nearby communities. The PUC said it did not expect confusion and could not adjust area code boundaries according to cultural beliefs. ------------------------------ Subject: Calling Cards Acquire Cachet Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 11:28:21 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Calling cards acquire cachet By Jennifer Merin Associated Press NO DOUBT about it. It's more expensive to call home than to call from home. But holders of pre-paid calling cards may get something besides telephone time for their dime. Some of the colorful palm-sized cards are becoming valuable as collectibles. The Elvis Presley series from Amerivox is particularly popular. Pre- packaged selections of "the King" are sold in denominations of $2, $7, $14 and $21 in souvenir shops near Graceland, his Tennessee home, and directly from the San Francisco-based company. A single gold-tone card with a picture of Elvis in a gold lame suit has a $7 face value. But the price in collectibles magazines is $149, and some Elvis fans are paying $175. The cost of convenience Other popular card series from Amerivox are Norman Rockwell, Legends of Baseball and John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Each card has a face value of $2 to $5, with domestic calling time at about 30 cents per minute. A $5 card from the U.S. Postal Service provides nine minutes of long-distance calls to anywhere in the United States. That breaks down to 56 cents a minute, compared with 16 to 30 cents, depending on the day and time, for an AT&T direct-dial call from New York to Los Angeles. The Postal Service cards, issued in cooperation with American Express Telecom Inc., are enlarged images of current stamps and come in $10, $20, $50 and $100 denominations. The latter breaks down to 33 cents a minute. International calls via pre-paid cards are about double the domestic rate. So what's the big deal? Convenience. And for travelers, that's worth a lot. To make calls with a pre-paid card, you need a touch-tone phone and a well-calloused index finger to punch in 30 digits: a toll-free number, a nine-digit PIN number and the desired area code and phone number. But you don't need pockets full of change, operator assistance or to fear that your telephone credit card number will be stolen. Users also avoid telephone surcharges levied on long-distance calls by some hotels and by carriers who issue credit cards. AT&T, for example, adds an 85-cent charge to any call, local or long distance, made with its credit card. Furthermore, if the pre-paid card is lost or stolen, depending on the card it may be replaced or the loss at least limited to the unused portion. But shop for the best rates before buying. While the Postal Service cards are readily available, they are also among the most costly. Earn miles on the phone American Airlines recently introduced a pre-paid calling card for its frequent fliers. The card, with a picture of a globe, is $45 for 135 minutes of domestic LD calls, or 33.3 cents per minute. On the high side, yes, but it comes with 500 bonus miles and, like the Postal Service card, is renewable via major credit card. Amerivox charges an activation fee of up to $10 for each card, so it's more economical to renew it than to buy a new one. If you are serious about collecting pre-paid calling cards as a possible investment, consult collector publications such as Phone Card Collector and The Telecard Times for best bets. One caveat when buying: There's been a shakeout in the industry, with many smaller providers falling to intense competition and financial mismanagement. So be familiar with the issuer before you buy. On the other hand, like some stamps and old baseball cards, the rarer ones may be the most valuable. Someday. IF YOU'RE INTERESTED For details: Amerivox: (800) 827-6299; U.S. Postal Service: (800) AXP-POST; American Airlines: (800) PRE-PAID. ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: List of Exchanges Involved in the 317/765 Split Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 17:06:28 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com CENTRAL INDIANA AREA CODE CHANGE INFORMATION EXCHANGE PREFIXES MOVING FROM AREA CODE 317 TO 765 ON FEBRUARY 1, 1997 214 234 245 246 249 258 268 275 279 281 282 284 285 286 287 288 289 292 294 295 296 324 325 332 339 340 342 344 345 348 349 354 358 360 361 362 363 364 366 369 376 378 379 384 385 386 395 396 397 413 414 420 423 426 427 428 429 433 434 435 436 437 438 447 448 449 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 463 468 472 473 474 476 477 478 480 482 483 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 515 519 521 522 523 524 526 527 528 529 531 533 534 536 537 538 548 552 563 564 565 566 567 569 572 583 584 586 589 593 597 618 619 620 621 622 623 628 629 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 651 652 653 654 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 667 668 669 672 674 675 676 677 679 683 688 689 698 714 716 720 721 723 724 728 729 730 732 734 737 739 741 742 743 744 746 747 748 749 751 754 755 759 760 762 763 764 766 768 771 772 774 775 778 779 785 789 793 794 795 798 825 827 828 832 833 836 847 853 855 857 859 860 863 864 866 868 869 874 883 884 886 893 914 918 922 932 934 935 938 939 942 944 945 947 948 960 962 963 964 965 966 967 969 973 981 983 984 985 986 987 993 998 ALL OTHER FORMER 317 EXCHANGE PREFIXES REMAIN IN THE 317 AREA CODE. Permissive dialing period begins February 1, 1997. Permissive dialing period ends June 28, 1997. Test number: (765) 281-6988 gives a recording if successfully dialed. This information was also forwarded to Pierre Thomson, and will appear on his site shortly. Links to his site are available at Pat's site or my own (in case you missed one of his posts :->) John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ From: Kevin D. Drucker Subject: ITU-T G.825 Questions Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 14:06:02 -0500 Organization: Hughes Network Systems - ENS Reply-To: kdrucker@hns.com ITU-T Recommendation G.825 - 1993, Section 4.3, Page 5: "it must be further noted that in some cases the equipment may be timed by an external 2 Mbits/s or 2 Mhz signal, for whch the relevant Recommendations apply." Question 1: Is this correct? Should this read 2.048 Mbits/s? Question 2: If it is correct, what recommendations apply? Please cc: my e-mail address with any responses. Thanks, Kevin D. Drucker | email: kdrucker@hns.com Member Technical Staff, | work: (301) 601-4167 Hardware Development | fax: (301) 601-4275 Hughes Network Systems | ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #636 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Nov 27 20:35:34 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id UAA09674; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 20:35:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 20:35:34 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611280135.UAA09674@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #637 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Nov 96 20:35:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 637 Inside This Issue: Happy Thanksgiving Day ! Area Code Woes (Tad Cook) NPA 415 Split to 209? (Tad Cook) 937 Area Code in Dayton, Ohio (David O. Laney) Re: Canada vs The Net (Evan Champion) Re: Canada vs The Net (Martin Baines) Re: Canada vs The Net (Ted Timar) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Nils Andersson) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Lisa Hancock) Re: Cocots in Las Vegas (Mike Fox) Re: Cocots in Las Vegas (Nils Andersson) Re: Cocots in Las Vegas (Lisa Hancock) Thanksgiving Day, 1996 (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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Area Code Woes Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 09:20:49 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (Somehow people are going to have to let go of the idea that an area code means something in terms of geography and community identity. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com) Area code proposal criticized -- 408 furor: PUC plan would split Willow Glen into two zones. By Dick Egner Mercury News Staff Writer In sprawling Los Angeles County, where telephone numbers are linked to a half-dozen area codes, people are accustomed to dialing 11 digits for most of their calls. Well, not in San Jose. And San Joseans, especially Willow Glen residents, would like to keep it that way. A plan to be considered by the California Public Utilities Commission would add an area code to San Jose, splitting Willow Glen along Hamilton and Pine avenues. Another plan would not change the portions of Santa Clara County in the 408 code, which is expected to run out of numbers in 1999 because of the explosion of cellular phones, computer modems, fax machines and pagers. This past spring, the PUC warned that new codes would be needed for both the 408 and 510 areas, and public hearings were conducted in October. The PUC could have a decision by mid-1997. It wouldn't cost more to call someone across Willow Glen into another area code, Pacific Bell assures customers. But that's not the point, says Michelle McGurk, an aide to Councilman Frank Fiscalini, who represents the Willow Glen area. "Some of it (the opposition) is intangible, like the feeling of community. San Jose is already a spread-out city, and the area code is sort of a unifying symbol," she said. Larry Ames, president of the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association, who wrote the PUC to argue against bisecting the city, said, "There must be better ways to set up a dividing line than through the middle of an established community like Willow Glen." "It's not clear that we have to divide the city," said Dave Ginsborg, an aide to Santa Clara County Supervisor Ron Gonzales, "and more importantly, not through a community like Willow Glen. You couldn't pick more of a community street to go down." For Willow Glen resident Bill O'Day, it would mean using a different area code to call his church on Cottle Avenue. "My kids would live in a different area code from some of their friends," he said. Besides the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association, opposition also has been voiced by the San Jose City Council, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and Pacific Bell. But the opposition may not be enough to sway the PUC. Keeping the part of Santa Clara County in the 408 code intact would mean running out of numbers in three to five years, according to McGurk. A split along Hamilton and Pine avenues would create enough numbers for five to seven years. The 510 area was split from the 415 area in 1991 and is projected to run out of phone numbers by the third quarter of 1998. The Peninsula's Daly City and Brisbane are scheduled to be split next year with some residents staying in the 415 area code and others changing to a new 650 area code. Monterey and San Benito counties, plus the portion of Santa Cruz County now in the 408 area, would be placed in a new area code in both PUC plans. City government, along with businesses and offices throughout San Jose, would have difficulty conducting business with two area codes, critics say. McGurk points to the parks department and other municipal offices on the former Almaden Winery property on Blossom Hill Road. "Like some businesses, we have locations throughout the city," she said. Businesses would have to pay for changing stationery, business cards, marketing and advertising, and neighborhood trouble-shooter handbooks, McGurk said. "It's lots of little things that add up in terms of costs." Businesses also could be faced with software and other communications changes, said San Josean Rosemary Thomas, a former IBM employee who redesigned the company's message centers. "There are huge amounts of work involved in the software changes and call forwarding changes," Thomas said. Most people probably could get used to dialing the additional area code digits in the event of a split, McGurk said. But some constituents in her district tell her they simply wouldn't call a person or office in a different area code. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: People like that, who 'simply wouldn't call a person or office in a different area code ...' really are ignorant. There is still one lady I talk to in Chicago (but as little as possible) who insists the only reason Ameritech installed area 847 and 773 was so 'they could create new long distance areas and charge more for those calls ...'. She was saying the same thing several years ago when 708 got carved out of 312. No amount of talking or reasoning convinces her otherwise. It would appear some people in San Jose are the same way. What are you going to do? I suggest the PUC quit asking them their opinion and just *do it* as they want. All area code boundary lines have to be drawn somewhere, and far too many people have a 'not on the street where I live' mentality. If not their street, then what street/neighborhood should it be? PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: NPA 415 Split to 209? Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 09:04:09 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (Here is an editorial from the San Jose Mercury News. Is the comment about NPA 209 another example of confusion on area codes by newspaper folks? 209 is Central California. I think of Fresno when I think 209. Is the area south of SF really going to join 209? Isn't it separated by 408? Tad Cook tad@ssc.com) Editorial: While we can, let's hang on to the `area' in our codes A proposal to split San Jose into different area codes has struck a sour note here -- particularly since the split would go right down the middle of one of the city's most cohesive neighborhoods, Willow Glen. Add our voice to the chorus howling that it's a terrible idea. Area codes are changing all over California, and there's no avoiding it. The proliferation of pagers, cellular phones and computer modems is using up all the numbers faster than you can say ISDN line. That means areas have to be ever smaller, and places cut out of them have to take new area codes. Next year, for instance, the Peninsula will split off from San Francisco's tony 415 code and become mundane 209. Yuck. We understand the problem, but we think there should be more consider- ation of neighborhood and even city borders. As much as possible, area code lines should follow city lines. This is not possible in vast Los Angeles, but it should be here. Even if the code areas become odd shapes on the map, the numbers will still be easier to remember if you can identify them with a specific city. The state Public Utilities Commission has decided ultimately to go to overlays for area codes. That is, rather than shrinking areas and making everybody change their business cards every couple years, just give new numbers a new three-digit code. If you're in area 408 and add a cell phone, the new number would have a different code from your existing number. Gradually, the "area" in area codes would become meaningless. But for now, the area code still means something, and it would be nice to have it mean specific cities. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But as was discussed here yesterday, even using the overlay method would not necessarily mean each time you got additional service that you would go into to the new code. There will always be residuals of the old code left for use when it is appropriate to do so, i.e. same subsriber with an additional line or a second subscriber in the same household, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David O. Laney Subject: 937 Area Code in Dayton, Ohio Date: 27 Nov 1996 03:38:29 GMT Organization: OARnet Ameritech here locally has sure kept the area code split between Cincinnati and Dayton pretty quiet. There has been no change on their web page for months. In fact if you access it, it still talks about the Cleveland 330 split. Certainly old news. But, even though we went into the code September 30th, Ameritech finally sent a flier to let us know what codes have moved into the 937 area code. For Dayton being a major city it would be nice if Dayton and not Cincinnati be mentioned on the Bellcore NANP web site. After all no one in Cincinnati has to change their phone number or reprogram their PBX's. According to their documentation these codes have moved: 208 220 222-229 233-240 246 250 252-259 261-268 273-279 282-283 285-286 288-299 307 316 320 322-332 334-335 337-339 341-342 344 348-349 354-356 358-359 362-365 368 370-379 382-384 386 390-394 399 406 416 426-431 433-449 452-457 461-466 468 470 472-473 476 477-478 480 484-486 488 491-493 495-499 525-526 534 544-549 555 567-568 572 578 581 584-588 592-593 596-597 599 620 623 628 630 640 642-645 647 652-653 656 663 666-667 669 675-676 678 685-687 692-693 695-696 698 725 747 750 754 760 764 766-767 773 775 778 780 783 787-788 795 826 828 832-837 839 842-843 845-850 854-855 857 859 862 864-866 873 878-879 882-885 890 898 927 935 940 947 962 964 966 968-969 973-974 976 978 981-982 987 997 997 Hopefully, I have copied the numbers correctly. If there is a problem reaching any of these numbers that have moved from 513 to 937, Ameritech invites you to call 1-800-378-2222. David O. Laney dlaney@interaxs.net +1 (937) 485-2765 ------------------------------ From: Evan Champion Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 22:38:48 -0500 Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site mexitech@netcom.com wrote: >> There is no technical way for Canadian Internet companies to block >> Zundel's site, but Yalden said the commission has jurisdiction over >> telephonic communications and Internet messages are transmitted over >> telephone lines. > You know, it could possibly be done, given the right scenario. *If* anything gets done with this (and given the ability of the Federal government to do anything useful, that is somewhat doubtful :-) I don't think it will have anything to do with the telecom networks. The only way I can foresee them getting away with this would be by saying that Canadian citizens that disseminate "hate literature" from outside the country may be prosecuted as if the literature was disseminated from within Canada. It is sort of the "when you live under my roof, you'll live by my rules" argument ... There is some precedent for that sort of thing. For example, people accused with war crimes can be arrested by a local government for participating in something that occured in another country (I don't know what happens with prosecution -- for example, with people accused with Nazi war crimes, are they prosecuted in the country in which they were arrested, or deported elsewhere?) It is not such a stretch to have a local government arrest a local citizen for a crime that is illegal here but that was perpetrated in another country. Note that this is quite different from something like Helms-Burton, which imposes local laws on foreign individuals. My thought is with respect to imposing local laws on local individuals when the crime is comitted in a foreign country. At any rate, this is quickly becoming less of a telecom issue :-) I've set follow-ups to can.legal. Evan ------------------------------ From: Martin Baines Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 17:14:21 +0000 Organization: Silicon Graphics mexitech@netcom.com wrote: > Dave Harrison (Davew@cris.com) wrote: >> OTTAWA (ITN) * In an unprecedented move, the Canadian Human Rights >> Commission has ordered hearings into complaints that Holocaust denier >> Ernst Zundel is promoting hatred on the Internet. >> Commission head Max Yalden said Friday he believes the commission >> has the jurisdiction to shut down Zundel's Web site, even though it's >> based at a Web server in California. >> "The signal's being picked up here, and where it's originating >> doesn't make any difference," Yalden said. > That would be an interesting bit of legal fighting. Love to see it. > And maybe next Mr. Yalden can go after any Ford owners out there > posting propaganda about how Fords are better than Chevies. [snip] Arguably there is already a similar precident in place with the US doing the "censoring". US laws prevent trade with Cuba, and the US tries to enforce them outside of its sovereign territory i.e it applies sanctions against non-US companies and individuals who trade with Cuba. As the US Trade and State departments have both said they consider the Internet to be fiscally neutral in terms of trade (i.e. it will be treated no differently from any other way of carrying out a transaction), it presumably is illegal for traffic from Cuban commerce sites to enter the US. Or even for a (say) Canadian to buy Havana Cigars from a tobacco merchant in London via the web. Trying to apply national laws over any international medium is a mine field, but that won't stop lawyers and legisators having a try! > Next thing you know, we got tek wars. Scary. Just wait until the Japanese demand key escrow rights to read all the information on RAM chips on computers inside the NSA. :-) Martin Baines - Telecommunications Market Consultant Silicon Graphics, Arlington Business Park, Reading, RG7 4SB, UK email: martinb@reading.sgi.com SGI vmail: 6-788-7842 phone: +44 118 925 7842 fax: +44 118 925 7545 URL: http://reality.sgi.com/martinb_reading/ Silicon Surf: http://www.sgi.com/International/UK/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 12:09:47 -0500 From: Ted Timar Organization: ISG Technologies Inc. Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net mexitech@netcom.com wrote: > Dave Harrison (Davew@cris.com) wrote: >> OTTAWA (ITN) * In an unprecedented move, the Canadian Human Rights >> Commission has ordered hearings into complaints that Holocaust denier >> Ernst Zundel is promoting hatred on the Internet. >> Commission head Max Yalden said Friday he believes the commission >> has the jurisdiction to shut down Zundel's Web site, even though it's >> based at a Web server in California. >> "The signal's being picked up here, and where it's originating >> doesn't make any difference," Yalden said. > That would be an interesting bit of legal fighting. Love to see it. > And maybe next Mr. Yalden can go after any Ford owners out there > posting propaganda about how Fords are better than Chevies. > As an example of course. I think people have misunderstood what is being said here. I haven't read a written report on what the commission is attempting, but I am interpreting what I heard on the radio. Mr. Zundel is in Canada. His Web site is running on a machine in Canada. It is connected to the net via an ISP in the US. Since the content is in Canada, Canadian laws still apply, and it is Canadian telecommunications that are being used. (Ie. Canada could shut down the site by denying Mr. Zundel a phone line.) Even if the site is hosted by a US server, denying Mr. Zundel a phone line would prevent him from updating it, and merely requesting that his ISP drop the page may be sufficient. A friendly request to the FBI could be helpful too. (Remember, the Canada and the US _are_ friends, and a request would certainly get due consideration.) Ted ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: 26 Nov 1996 18:47:36 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , Telecom@Eureka.vip. best.com (Linc Madison) writes: > It seems that the sole purpose of payphone deregulation is to permit > corporations that are already highly profitable to gouge the public for > their own windfall profits. I say, to hell with all of them. If it so damn profitable, why don't you do it? The whole theory that somehow a privately owned corporation OWES some service to the public is faulty. The only times it makes sense to impose such requirements are 1) Imposing "public service" requirements in return for e.g. a monopoly, or access to frequency space that is in some sense "public". 2) To handle true emergencies. Thus, it makes perfect sense to require ANY operator to allow 911 calls, under ALL circumstances. BTW, my local cellop (LACellular) blocks 911 if you have outgoing call block. Clearly, this is WRONG!) It does not follow that the government under the threat of force should require somebody to allow anybody to call anybody else; 800 is a large part of total traffic, especially since telcos advertise their own 800 numbers a la 800-CALL ATT which in turn goes anywhere. As a practical argument, requiring unlimited 800 access will discourage a lot of marginal phones and thus make them LESS available, not more! Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: 26 Nov 1996 19:55:37 GMT Organization: Philadelphia City Paper's City Net {Consumer Reports} did research on breakfast cereals and found an awfully big part of the price was promotional costs. The cereal itself was very cheap, with packaging and distribution costs only a little more. I don't mean to digress into breakfast economics, but it should be noted that competition in the marketplace is certainly not the great panecea everyone makes it out to be. Let's remember that the economic model of "pure competition" we learned in school exists rarely in real life. We don't have easy entry of new competitors, nor everyone knowing all the facts. Say, for example, there was a strict law requiring COCOTS and AOS to _clearly_ post their service charges on every pay phone. Their revenues would drop way down -- those sleazy outfits take advantage of the fact most consumers don't have a clue about modern pay phones, and wouldn't know how or where to get rates (and a lot of those phones you can NOT get accurate rate info!) I submit that the real advocates of telephone industry competition on newcomers who are looking for a marketplace to sell services and equipment. That's fine for them, but not necessarily in the public interest. ------------------------------ From: Mike Fox Date: 27 Nov 96 08:09:31 GMT Subject: Re: Cocots in Las Vegas > I was in Las Vegas for Comdex last week, and noticed mosts > hotel/casinos now use "no-name" providers. You cannot call 10288. > 800 numbers cost 90 or 95 cents depending on the company. Poor > operator service as well. (And little sympathy.) When I was in Vegas in May, you could still make an 800 number call for free from a payphone -- I did it several times a day. I guess the rules have changed there in the last several months -- probably part of this whole "payphone deregulation" stuff. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Las Vegas is in general a rip-off town. > What you are saying is not surprising at all; it is the norm there. Not only is Las Vegas a rip-off town, but it's also a sucker town. A perfect match. When I was there in May, a family got on the elevator with us and the woman was complaining to her husband that she had just finished calling home to her family. She said the payphone just kept asking for quarters and she kept feeding it, and she was on the phone maybe five minutes. When the husband asked how much she had put into the phone, she had no idea, because she had simply fed the phone from her bucket-o-quarters that everyone carries around for slot machines, but she guessed it was in the area of twenty or so quarters! What a perfect town for a COCOT! People wandering around in a semi-daze with huge cups full of quarters, already conditioned to feed those quarters into machines all day. Of course, Vegas is also the town where I first encountered the new "foreign user" ATM fees. > Be glad you don't have to live there all the time. PAT] I wouldn't be so harsh in that area. Vegas is not for me (not enough green), but you can live there cheaply. There is no state income tax, and you can eat and live cheaply if you avoid gambling and tourist areas (except go into the tourist areas just to eat the cheap food that many casinos offer to lure in the suckers). Mike ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Cocots in Las Vegas Date: 26 Nov 1996 18:47:37 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , meyer@idirect.com (Meyer Toole) writes: > I was in Las Vegas for Comdex last week, and noticed mosts > hotel/casinos now use "no-name" providers. You cannot call 10288. > 800 numbers cost 90 or 95 cents depending on the company. Poor > operator service as well. (And little sympathy.) Las Vegas is very payphone-poor too! Last time as was at Comdex some years ago, the few payphones had long lines waiting! I think this is deliberate, they do not want you to call home. This is for the same reason there are no clocks and rarely any daylight -- but one service is provided amply, you guessed it, CASH MACHINES, versatellers etc to help you get cash from your credit, debit or ATM card. How very thoughtful of them! Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Cocots in Las Vegas Date: 26 Nov 1996 19:56:43 GMT Organization: Philadelphia City Paper's City Net > I was in Las Vegas for Comdex last week, and noticed mosts > hotel/casinos now use "no-name" providers. You cannot call 10288. > 800 numbers cost 90 or 95 cents depending on the company. Poor > operator service as well. (And little sympathy.) Could someone post what is the Federal Law, if any, on pay telephones? I thought they had to provide free 800 access and access to your own LD carrier if you want. Is that not true? Thanks. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Thanksgiving Day, 1996 Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 19:23:00 EST Thursday is Thanksgiving Day, a legal holiday in the United States. I want to take this opportunity to wish a very happy holiday to all the USA readers of this Digest, and urge you to remember the purpose of the day. Although Thanksgiving has been celebrated in the USA since the beginning of our country, it was not formally recognized as a national holiday until President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Congress at that time (1930's era) passed legislation dictating that Thanksgiving would always be celebrated on the fourth Thursday in November of each year (which is not necessarily the last Thursday of the month; sometimes there are five Thursdays.) Perhaps you recall the Bart Simpson cartoon about Thanksgiving: the Simpson's have sat down to eat dinner and Bart has been told to ask the blessing. It goes like this: "Well God, my father worked hard all year to earn the money to pay for all this food and all the things we have in our house. My mother has worked hard to cook all this food and create this delicious dinner. So what did you have to do with it, God? Absolutely no- thing at all! Thanks for nothing, God!" And perhaps you recall the historical account of the very first Thanksgiving celebrated in the seventeenth century by the early settlers in the new world. The residents in the small community held assemblies from time to time to discuss matters of mutual concern, and at one such meeting, the leaders were giving an 'annual report'; discussing the things which had happened in the past year and their plans for the year ahead. The report was very grim: the farmers talked about how poor the crops had been, and the loss of some farm animals which had become sick and died. The treasurer gave his report and the bottom line was the town treasury was almost depleted and each resident would be expected to pay more taxes to provide what money was needed. The constable told of those residents who had broken the law and been punished during past year. There had also been a great deal of illness and several residents had died. Even the doctor had become quite ill after treating a patient who was contagious. There had been two fires which destroyed buildings and the comm- unity's resources had been nearly exhausted rebuilding what had been lost in the fires. After some discussion (these community assemblies were usually held on Sunday afternoon and evening) the consensus seemed to be that some demonstration of unhappieness and discontent was in order. If their present circumstances were God's fault, then a demonstration would show that to God. On the other hand, if the present circumstances were their own fault, then a demonstration would indicate their desire to do better in the year ahead. And how would they demonstrate? They decided there would be a day of total fasting and silence. Some in the community wanted two such days, but eventually they decided to have only one. On a day in the near future, as a display of their disenchantment with conditions in this new world, they would completely fast; they would remain silent and in their homes; and they would spend the entire time studying the Scripture. It would be, they decided, a good way to show God how very displeased they were about the way things were going. But one of the farmers spoke up with a different suggestion. He said instead of such a negative approach, they should try to put it all in a more positive light. Instead of fasting, he said they should have a huge dinner, with all everyone could possibly eat (and drink!) and a party. In addition to the food, he said, there should be cavorting and drinking and carrying-on all day long and well into the night. He said it would be a good way to show God that we are perfectly happy and content with what we have. His suggestion was first received as blasphemy. These hard working and rather stern people in the town were not much for partying anyway; they were much more in the mood for a day of punishment and they thought what the farmer had suggested was tantamount to 'mocking God'; that to eat to excess as he had suggested and drink to the point of almost drunkeness and laugh and enjoy the day would be a very very bad thing considering how bad the past year had gone. But they decided to try it, and they did it again the next year about the same time, and the year after that. And we today over two hundred years later continue the tradition. I suppose if those people who favored the idea of fasting, spending the day in silence and contemplation of the Scrip- ture had prevailed, our annual festive holiday would be instead a day of sadness. Rejoice and give thanks! PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #637 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Nov 29 12:50:40 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA01411; Fri, 29 Nov 1996 12:50:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 12:50:40 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199611291750.MAA01411@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #638 TELECOM Digest Fri, 29 Nov 96 12:50:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 638 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Area Code Splits - Why? (Larry Lee) Re: NPA 415 Split to 209? (Linc Madison) Middle Tennessee's New Area Code (Tad Cook) 414 Split for Wisconsin (Tad Cook) Burbank and Glendale to Stay in 818 (Lauren Weinstein) Re: Area Code Woes (Javier Henderson) Re: 937 Area Code in Dayton, Ohio (John Cropper) Re: Canada vs The Net (Tad Cook) Re: Canada vs The Net (Lou Coles) Re: Canada vs The Net (mexitech@netcom.com) Re: Canada vs The Net (John R. Covert) Nazi Usenet Group Forming (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'. NOTE: Names and email addresses perinted herein are intended for the exclusive use of the correspondents of this list to exchange mail with each otehr. All other name-collecting is forbidden. 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: lclee@primenet.com (Larry Lee) Subject: Area Code Splits - Why? Date: 28 Nov 1996 10:51:01 -0700 Organization: Primenet Without changing my street address, I used to live in the 213 area code, now I live in the 818 area code, soon I will live in the 626 or 562 area code. Today I can make free local calls to 818, 213, 310, 714, and 909 area codes. Believe me when I say that 1+10 digit dialing is the rule and not the exception to the rule. With the current method of letting an area grow until it needs to split and then assigning half the area a new area code, I suspect that my new area code will not be my last area code. I understand that all of us are living in multi-phone homes, we are getting more dedicated fax phone numbers, more modems etc. Obviously the number of phone devices is going up and this requires more phones numbers. Or does it? If the phone company would extend DID into standard analog voice lines, then we could go to Radio Shack and buy an extremely stupid telehone switch ($100-$200 range) which would accept an additional digit and route the call to 1 of 9 extensions (leaving extension 0 as a default). This would allow homes/small businesses to have 10 separate phone numbers with little to no phone company participation in digits. I'm sure that popular conventions would arise such as 9 is a fax, 8 is the answering machine, etc. Splitting an area code doubles the number of phone number in an geographic area, but this scheme would give you 9 times the numbers (if only 1 DID digit were supported). My personal view is that making decision in the CO of who or what you want to talk at the phone company CI is less efficient, it consumes phone numbers and local loop circuits needlessly. Making the decision at the customer site is more efficient. Every member of my household can have their own phone number (the default phone number is reserved for telemarketers and goes directly to the answering machine!). What's wrong with this scheme? Why are things being done this way? Larry ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: NPA 415 Split to 209? Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 03:13:46 -0800 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) wrote: > (Here is an editorial from the San Jose Mercury News. Is the comment > about NPA 209 another example of confusion on area codes by newspaper > folks? 209 is Central California. I think of Fresno when I think > 209. Is the area south of SF really going to join 209? Isn't it > separated by 408? Tad Cook tad@ssc.com) > Editorial: While we can, let's hang on to the `area' in our codes > ... Next year, for instance, the Peninsula will split off from San > Francisco's tony 415 code and become mundane 209. Yuck. This is not merely sloppy, it's downright wrong. The 209 area code includes Fresno, Modesto, Stockton, and Merced. It is located to the east of 408. The Peninsula (all but the northeastern bit of San Mateo County, plus several cities in northwest Santa Clara County) will change next August from 415 to 650, not to 209. Discussions about relief for area code 209 have taken place, complete with ill-informed editorials in the Fresno newspaper, but no date nor proposed boundary has been proposed. However, the basic point of the {Mercury News} editorial was that it would be ridiculously confusing to do a geographic split of 408 that cut the city of San Jose in half, right through the middle of Willow Glen. In particular, the obvious question is why Sunnyvale and Cupertino are being proposed to stay in 408 while San Jose is being chopped up. Any split of area code 408 should leave San Jose whole, even if that means putting Sunnyvale, Cupertino, Los Gatos, and Milpitas into the new area code. On that point, the {Mercury News} got the story right. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ Subject: Middle Tennessee's New Area Code Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:21:00 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Regulators to Answer Questions about Middle Tennessee's New Area Codes By Cree Lawson, Nashville Banner, Tenn. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Nov. 27--Midstate residents will have a chance to grill state officials about proposed area code changes in a series of public hearings that will be held around Middle Tennessee. The Tennessee Regulatory Authority plans to hold 18 meetings across the state to ease confusion over a proposed split in the 615 area code. TRA directors told their staff Tuesday to hit the road and tell rural residents exactly who will keep the 615 prefix, who will get the new 931 code and why some people will have to dial 10 digits for cross-county calls. "There's so much consumer confusion," TRA Director Sara Kyle said. "And who do consumers turn to? That's the question I hear out in these counties." TRA staff members and local phone company representatives will begin holding the hearings in mid-December. Dates have not been set. The hearings will consist of: Meetings in 16 counties -- one in each county that will be split even slightly by the area code changes. Three regional meetings in Cookeville, Clarksville and Columbia to catch citizens in counties that will not be split but that will receive the new 931 area code. (The regional hearing in Columbia will double as a county meeting.) The directors broadened a staff proposal that had called for seven meetings in the counties that would be most affected. The area code changes, driven by increased demand for phone numbers, will take effect by 1999. The Tennessee Telecommunications Association's plans to institute the new 931 area code for rural Middle Tennessee counties would leave parts of six counties in the 615 area. Davidson County and the remaining counties would keep the 615 area code. The TRA has no authority over the new coding plans, but it does have some regulatory clout over BellSouth and the state's smaller telephone companies, which make up the Tennessee Telecommunications Association. Of the counties that would be split by the area code change, only seven would have more than 75 customers using a separate area code from the rest of the county. Those seven counties are Bedford, DeKalb, Houston, Macon, Maury, Smith and Williamson. Current toll-free and long-distance boundaries would not be affected. Within 10 years, Tennessee will add four new area codes to the 901, 615 and 423 in use today, industry executives say. Area codes began with 901 for the entire state. The 615 area code was added in 1954 for East and Middle Tennessee phone customers. The 423 area code was added in September 1995. The Associated Press contributed to this report. ------------------------------ Subject: 414 Split for Wisconsin Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:22:31 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Wisconsin Regulators Approve Split of 414 Area Code By Lee Bergquist, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Nov. 27--State regulators approved a staff-backed plan to split eastern Wisconsin's 414 area code into two area codes next year a move that will keep Milwaukee and its suburbs in the old calling area. Green Bay and cities in the Fox Valley will get a new area code in late 1997. The Wisconsin Public Service Commission ordered the split to accommodate the growing need for additional phone numbers. By backing the staff recommendation, the three-member board opted against a so-called overlay plan in which all callers would have been forced to dial 10 digits to make a local call. The new area code number will be chosen by Bellcore, the North American numbering-plan administrator. That three-digit number will be assigned to all phone customers north of a line roughly from Whitewater to Belgium. Customers can start dialing the new area code in July 1997. It will go into effect permanently in October 1997. That's about three months sooner than officials had been expecting. Officials expect that Milwaukee and the surrounding area that stays with the 414 area code will have enough new phone number combinations to last about eight years. The territory with the new area code is expected to have enough numbers to last about 15 years. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Nov 96 04:02 PST From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Burbank and Glendale to Stay in 818 Greetings. In a move that surprised just about all observers, the California PUC has decided to override the most recent Los Angeles area split plans and allow both Burbank and Glendale to remain in the "San Fernando Valley" 818 code, instead of having part of Burbank and all of Glendale move to the new "San Gabriel Valley" 626 code. Pasadena and points east move to 626. While this placates some folks for now, it ensures that the next split will have to occur even earlier than originally anticipated (unless number portability and overlays are considered acceptable by then ...) We seem to be getting a split about every two weeks around L.A. now ... --Lauren-- ------------------------------ From: Javier Henderson Subject: Re: Area Code Woes Date: 28 Nov 1996 15:21:52 GMT Tad Cook wrote (): > (Somehow people are going to have to let go of the idea that an > area code means something in terms of geography and community > identity. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com) > Area code proposal criticized > -- 408 furor: PUC plan would split Willow Glen into two zones. (rest deleted for brevity) I tend to group telephone area codes, and postal zip codes, in the same category. I've no idea what sort of emotional attachment some people develop to area codes, but when they added zip codes to the city I used to live in (Rancho Cucamonga, CA), no one said a peep about it. The article quoted by Mr. Cook even had area residents saying that the 408 area code "gives them a sense of community". Totally beyond me. For the record, I'm now a resident of the 408 area code, and quite frankly, I couldn't care less if it changed tomorrow. I can see how businesses that had the same number for a long time getting a bit worked up about this, but they usually give long grace periods during which they can notify customers, change stationery, etc. I suppose people complain because it is, well, change. javier [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However the one mprovement

lan was implemented by the post office back in the early 1960's and people were different then; they were less consumer-rights oriented in those days. If a large company made some major change in a process, people just went along with it for the most part. There was however a very big stink in some places over the change from exchange names to all digits in phone numbers which also took place beginning in the early 1960's. A group in San Francisco called the ADDL -- the Anti-Digital Dialing League -- made a fuss about this topic for several years. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: 937 Area Code in Dayton, Ohio Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 12:19:28 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com David O. Laney wrote: > Ameritech here locally has sure kept the area code split between > Cincinnati and Dayton pretty quiet. There has been no change on their > web page for months. Cincinatti Bell was 'responsible' for notification of all parties involved in the 513/937 split. They had some information prior to the split, but no exchange information. > In fact if you access it, it still talks about > the Cleveland 330 split. Certainly old news. But, even though we went > into the code September 30th, Ameritech finally sent a flier to let us > know what codes have moved into the 937 area code. For Dayton being a > major city it would be nice if Dayton and not Cincinnati be mentioned > on the Bellcore NANP web site. After all no one in Cincinnati has to > change their phone number or reprogram their PBX's. Exactly, and 513 was retained wholly by CinBellTel, and they didn't feel very much of a need to publicize the exchanges changing to 937 (since they were customers of 'other' companies) ... > Hopefully, I have copied the numbers correctly. If there is a problem > reaching any of these numbers that have moved from 513 to 937, > Ameritech invites you to call 1-800-378-2222. Pierre Thomson has a complete list at: http://www1.mhv.net/~Bruderhof/areacode/ac937.htm This list is supplied (at a cost of $10 per list, now) by $BellCore$... It includes ALL exchanges of all other companies involved in the split ... not just the Ameritech ones you provided (but thanx for the breakdown) ... John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 17:50:50 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Ted Timar writes: > I think people have misunderstood what is being said here. I haven't > read a written report on what the commission is attempting, but I am > interpreting what I heard on the radio. > Mr. Zundel is in Canada. His Web site is running on a machine in > Canada. It is connected to the net via an ISP in the US. Since the > content is in Canada, Canadian laws still apply, and it is Canadian > telecommunications that are being used. (Ie. Canada could shut down > the site by denying Mr. Zundel a phone line.) Another aspect of this issue that may be misunderstood is the difference between Canadian and U.S. laws. Mr. Zundel denies that there was any program by his home country (Germany) to exterminate Jews during the Third Reich, and in the U.S. this sort of speech is absolutely protected by the U.S. Constitution. Not so in Canada or Germany. Holocaust Revisionists are not permitted to visit Canada as a matter of public policy, and denying the reality of the holocaust is illegal. An example is the expulsion of British historian and revisionist David Irving a few years ago. A good book which details this policy is WEB OF HATE, by Warren Kinsella, published in Canada in 1994 by HarperCollins Publishers LTD. In Germany we saw the recent arrest of U.S. citizen (and Nazi) Gary Lauck, who publishes a large volume of German language Nazi literature in Nebraska and ships it to Germany. He was arrested in Denmark and extradited to Germany, where he was recently sent to prison. What he does is odious to most U.S. citizens, but it is not a crime here. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com ------------------------------ From: Lou Coles Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 01:50:46 -0800 Organization: ANA Evan Champion wrote: > mexitech@netcom.com wrote: >>> There is no technical way for Canadian Internet companies to block >>> Zundel's site, but Yalden said the commission has jurisdiction over >>> telephonic communications and Internet messages are transmitted over >>> telephone lines. >> You know, it could possibly be done, given the right scenario. > *If* anything gets done with this (and given the ability of the Federal > government to do anything useful, that is somewhat doubtful :-) I don't > think it will have anything to do with the telecom networks. > The only way I can foresee them getting away with this would be by > saying that Canadian citizens that disseminate "hate literature" from > outside the country may be prosecuted as if the literature was > disseminated from within Canada. It is sort of the "when you live under > my roof, you'll live by my rules" argument ... > There is some precedent for that sort of thing. For example, people > accused with war crimes can be arrested by a local government for > participating in something that occured in another country (I don't > know what happens with prosecution -- for example, with people accused > with Nazi war crimes, are they prosecuted in the country in which they > were arrested, or deported elsewhere?) It is not such a stretch to > have a local government arrest a local citizen for a crime that is > illegal here but that was perpetrated in another country. Actually this wasn't the case in many instances of Nazi War Criminals as many hid in countries with no extradition treaties. This can get real messy. Wasn't James Earl Ray captured in England, then England could not agree to US extradition because he might get the death penalty? ------------------------------ From: mexitech@netcom.com Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 19:34:24 GMT Ted Timar (tmatimar@isgtec.com) wrote: > mexitech@netcom.com wrote: >> Dave Harrison (Davew@cris.com) wrote: >>> OTTAWA (ITN) * In an unprecedented move, the Canadian Human Rights >>> Commission has ordered hearings into complaints that Holocaust denier >>> Ernst Zundel is promoting hatred on the Internet. >>> Commission head Max Yalden said Friday he believes the commission >>> has the jurisdiction to shut down Zundel's Web site, even though it's >>> based at a Web server in California. >>> "The signal's being picked up here, and where it's originating >>> doesn't make any difference," Yalden said. >> That would be an interesting bit of legal fighting. Love to see it. > Mr. Zundel is in Canada. His Web site is running on a machine in > Canada. It is connected to the net via an ISP in the US. Since the > content is in Canada, Canadian laws still apply, and it is Canadian > telecommunications that are being used. (Ie. Canada could shut down > the site by denying Mr. Zundel a phone line.) > Even if the site is hosted by a US server, denying Mr. Zundel a phone > line would prevent him from updating it, and merely requesting that > his ISP drop the page may be sufficient. A friendly request to the > FBI could be helpful too. If I was at the FBI, I would laugh at this request. I am not in favor of the policy, but it was Canada's opening gambit for the satellite decoder chip. They have not gone after Canadian citizens that have illegally smuggled these satellite decoders into Canada, so why should we change our methods for them on this particular issue? I like Canada, and its citizens, but some of their policies vis a vis print and other media are clearly an oxymoronic attempt by politicians, under the Canadian content for Canadians banner. They will think of something, they always do. Patrick mexitech@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Nov 96 09:19:55 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Canada vs The Net Ted Timar wrote: >Mr. Zundel is in Canada. Right so far. > His Web site is running on a machine in Canada. Wrong. His WWWeb site is at WebCom, located in Santa Cruz, California. > Even if the site is hosted by a US server, denying Mr. Zundel a phone > line would prevent him from updating it, Judging from the number of mirror sites (search in AltaVista for zundel) helping ensure that Zundel's views get around the blocking of access to WebCom that has been implemented from various corners of the net, I suspect he would have plenty of help getting his site and the mirrors updated. People who despise his views are actively helping him in the name of Net Freedom. > and merely requesting that his ISP drop the page may be sufficient. The ISP is on the record as supporting his right to express his views, as abhorrent as they are, and even if it prevents other WebCom customers from being accessed from certain places. > A friendly request to the FBI could be helpful too. (Remember, Canada > and the US _are_ friends, and a request would certainly get due > consideration.) The FBI cannot do anything. Zundel is protected by the United States Constitution, which prevents the U.S. from taking any action. Germany has already requested FBI action in the case of Neo-nazis mailing illegal material into Germany, and has been told "sorry, our hands are tied by the Bill of Rights." john ------------------------------ From: icb@juno.com (Judith Oppenheimer) Subject: Nazi Usenet Group Forming Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 20:56:23 EST My brother passed this along to me. If you're so inclined, perhaps you could help bolster the "no" vote. TIA - Judith Oppenheimer ICB P.S. Have a wonderful Thanksgiving. --------- Begin forwarded message ---------- From: "Gary M. Oppenheimer" <0002180241@mcimail.com> Subject: (Forwarded) FW: Nazi use group Date: Tue, 26 Nov 96 17:19 EST FYI........... please pass on as you see fit.... Hey all, please read and act on the following, and then please forward the message to friends ... A group of NEO-NAZIS are trying to form a newsgroup on Usenet called "rec.music.white-power", so that they can get their message of hate out to young people using the Internet. Newsgroups are public discussions on the Internet and their formation requires enough support from the Internet community. EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US HAS ONE VOTE when it comes to creating a new Usenet group. I hope you will vote NO and thereby tell these NAZIS we don't want their stuff on the net. Below is the procedure, please repost this plea and get the NO vote out. If you want to see the official call for votes, you can try on "news.group". DO NOT VOTE TWICE - that would constitute voting fraud. HOW TO VOTE: Send e-mail (posts to newsgroups are invalid) to: music-vote@sub-rosa.com This is an impartial, third party vote taker. Please check the address before you mail your vote. Your mail message, to be accepted by the counting computer, must contain only the following statement with no signature: I vote NO on rec.music.white-power Vote counting is automated. Failure to follow these directions may mean that your vote does not get counted. If you do not receive an acknowledgment of your vote within three days contact the votetaker about the problem. It's your responsibility to make sure your vote is registered correctly. Here's what Canada's George Burdi, of the neo-Nazi Heritage Front, had to say about this vote, on February 21, on his RESISTANCE mailing list: "There is a call for votes coming on rec.music.white-power in the next week or so, and you will be notified in a special issue of RREN exactly what to do. FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE LETTER. Let me be perfectly blunt and state that we have more than enough net-nazis to win this thing handsdown. But every one of you must vote YES! And just voting yes means nothing unless you do it properly. So you have been forewarned. The instructions are coming to your email box soon, and they are not complicated. Just follow them as told, and we will have a WP music newsgroup finally!" If Mr. Burdi's confidence disturbs you, please give this letter the widest possible distribution, and help us deliver the largest NO vote in the history of the UseNet. --------------------------------- End forwarded message --------- End forwarded message ---------- ------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Judith Oppenheimer has been a regular participant here in the Digest for quite a long time so I am passing this along as a favor to her. I do not like Nazis, however I do not participate in Usenet voting, because it is frequently a farce. Let me tell you what will happen if you 'deliver the largest NO vote in Usenet history' (take it from someone who a few years delivered a very large NO vote on a newsgroup creation) ... you will be subject to all sorts of flaming and hate mail. The right to vote at all of many voters will be challenged ... and the newsgroup may be created anyway. If the NO votes win, there will be a call for a second period of voting in the hopes that more YES votes can be rounded up the second time around. The first vote will be declared invalid due to 'improper influences' and they will start all over again. What is not generally understood by people who vote in Usenet newsgroup creation polls is that the vote is **purely advisory at best**; David Lawrence of UUNET will create the group if he sees fit to do so. It is hoped of course that the voting results echo his personal feelings on the matter; it avoids the need to have a second period of voting or a power play where the group is simply created anyway. My own experience in the comp.dcom.telecom.tech debacle a few years ago taught me that it is a waste of time and energy to try and influence any newsgroup creation. If you wish to accept this attempt to humor you and make you feel that you anything to say in the matter, go ahead and vote. Let's see how far your NO votes get you in the end. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #638 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sat Nov 30 23:52:29 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA20987; Sat, 30 Nov 1996 23:52:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 23:52:29 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612010452.XAA20987@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #639 TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Nov 96 23:53:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 639 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson NJ 201/973, 908/732 Area Code Dispute Postponed (Greg Monti) Two Proposals For Virginia Area 703 (Greg Monti) St. Lucia Smut (Steve Hayes) Re: Area Code Splits - Why? (John Cropper) Re: Area Code Splits - Why? (Javier Henderson) Re: Area Code Splits - Why? (Scott Robert Dawson) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Nils Andersson) Re: Payphone Deregulation (Linc Madison) UK Changes in Codes November 28, 1996 (Steven Collins) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 18:51:04 -0500 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: NJ 201/973, 908/732 Area Code Dispute Postponed A story entitled "Area code dispute is put on hold" was published in the November 30 edition of the _Newark_Star-Ledger_. A summary: When Bell Atlantic New Jersey laid out a proposed dividing line to split off area code 973 from the existing 201 (and 732 from 908), the dividing line followed central office wiring boundaries, not municipal boundaries. This resulted in 21 towns being divided into two area codes. The two pieces of each town would still be a local call from each other, but calls would be dialed with 1+10 digits. The dialing rule in New Jersey, as of a few years ago, has been that local calls crossing area codes boundaries must be 11 digits. After the usual "no dividing line in my back yard" howling from community activists, several legislators have reached a tentative agreement with Bell Atlantic to allow 7-digit dialing of local calls along the area code boundary. This will allow people on one side of the line to call the other section of their town without caring what the area code is. In other words, we're going back to the situation we had a few years ago, when 7 digit calls across area code boundaries in NJ were allowed. The story correctly notes that this 7-digit dialing pattern wastes large numbers of prefixes. 200 to 300 prefixes (2 to 3 million phone numbers) would be unavailable for assignment. Toll calls within a single area code in NJ are currently dialed with just 7 digits. (Ten digits and 1+10 digts are also permitted.) For example, the prefix 997 is used in area code 201 (in Kearney) at a location near the new area code 973 boundary. If callers in Newark (in area 973) are allowed to call the 997 prefix with just 7 digits, then the 997 prefix cannot be used AT ALL in area 973. The story notes that this will require another area code split within two years. Without the code protection scheme, NJ would need anoher split in four years instead. The agreement between the legislators and Bell Atlantic is apparently temporay for a period of "one year". The story does not say when the one-year period begins. It probably begins at the end of the permissive dialing period, in effect extending permissive dialing for one extra year for border exchanges. One legisltaor quoted in the story said he believe that a better solution needs to be developed, such as forcing all wireless services into a separate area code. The legislator said that the intent of the new telecommunications law was not to prevent the forcing of newer technologies into new area codes, but to prevent two companies offering the same technology from being split up among codes. My comment: In other words, the plan appeases politicians today by putting off the inevitable until tomorrow. Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 18:51:08 -0500 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Two Proposals For Virginia Area 703 According to stories published in the _Fairfax_Journal_ (14 Nov 96) and in the _Washington_Post_ (15 Nov 96), Bell Atlantic Virginia and GTE Virginia have proposed two possible plans to relieve the predicted exhaust of prefixes in area code 703. A summary: Area code 540 was split off of 703 about a year ago. This is the *next* split. Only 313 of the 761 prefixes available in 703 are unassigned at present. 703 is expected to exhaust in 1999. One alternative is an overlay, favored by BA and GTE. Local calls within and outside an area code would be dialed with 10 digits, and 7-digit dialing would be disallowed. Toll calls would be 1+10 digits, same as now. This would be the same as the upcoming overlays in neigboring Maryland where 240 will overlay 301, and 443 will overlay 410 next year. The alternative plan, favored by AT&T, MCI and Sprint, would place a dividing line along the western edge of the Alexandria-Arlington rate area. The Alexandria-Arlington and Pentagon rate areas would be in 703. The remaining rate areas currently in 703 (Falls-Church McLean, Fairfax-Vienna, Herndon-Reston, Dulles, Dulles Metro, Braddock-Centreville, Engleside-Gunston, Lorton, Lorton Metro, Leesburg-Ashburn, Occoquan- Woodbridge, Dumfries, Quantico, Dale City-Hoadly, Independent Hill, Nokesville, Manassas and Haymarket) would get a new area code. The _Post_ story has a map, showing a jagged dividing line which crosses the Arlington-Fairfax County border twice. It also crosses the Alexandria City-Fairfax County border twice. A rate area may encompass several central offices. For example, Alexandria-Arlington contains ten CO's. Virtually all cellular phone numbers with a 703 area code are assigned to the Alexandria-Arlington rate area. There are 520,000 cellular numbers and 250,000 pager numbers currently in 703. Carriers who are beginning to compete with Bell Atlantic have an additional 50,000 numbers assigned to them in 703. The _Post_ story notes that recent attempts to install overlays in Texas, California and New Jersey were rejected in favor of splits, while there was surprisingly little oppostion to Maryland's two overlays. Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: 29 Nov 96 16:28:08 EST From: Steve Hayes <100112.606@CompuServe.COM> Subject: St. Lucia Smut The BBC-TV consumer series "Watchdog" this week ran a follow-up item on people who have been charged by BT for calls to smut lines in the Caribbean and other places. Over 650 people have complained to the programme about charges for calls they say they never made. The most common destinations include the Virgin Islands, Guyana, Panama, Sierra Leone, Hong Kong and Tuvalu. St. Lucia is the most frequent of all. Analysis of the offending phone bills and of the people affected seems to show that they are indeed telling the truth. In some cases, whole series of calls were billed so close together in time that it would have been just about impossible to dial them that quickly. A disproportionate number of people affected were served by System X exchanges and there was an implication that these may have been hacked in some way to falsify the billing records (insert usual tales of hacking instructions on the Internet here). In fact after the paging scams, I wonder if the calls in question were ever made by anyone or if the operators of the lines are hacking in and planting false billing records. The most interesting bit is that the BBC sent a reporter to St. Lucia where one of the lines in question comes from. Bet there were plenty of volunteers for that assignment! The reporter interviewed the manager of the phone company, a prominently branded part of Cable and Wireless. He was surprisingly open about it and we even saw the equipment in question - looking like a pretty ordinary IVR system. It seems to be co-located in the C&W facility. At least for C&W's sake, let's hope it's merely co-located. Steve Hayes, Swansea, UK ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: Area Code Splits - Why? Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 13:49:10 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com Larry Lee wrote: > Without changing my street address, I used to live in the 213 area > code, now I live in the 818 area code, soon I will live in the 626 or > 562 area code. Today I can make free local calls to 818, 213, 310, > 714, and 909 area codes. Believe me when I say that 1+10 digit dialing > is the rule and not the exception to the rule. > With the current method of letting an area grow until it needs to > split and then assigning half the area a new area code, I suspect that > my new area code will not be my last area code. > I understand that all of us are living in multi-phone homes, we are > getting more dedicated fax phone numbers, more modems etc. Obviously > the number of phone devices is going up and this requires more phones > numbers. > Or does it? > If the phone company would extend DID into standard analog voice > lines, then we could go to Radio Shack and buy an extremely stupid > telehone switch ($100-$200 range) which would accept an additional > digit and route the call to 1 of 9 extensions (leaving extension 0 as > a default). This would allow homes/small businesses to have 10 > separate phone numbers with little to no phone company participation > in digits. I'm sure that popular conventions would arise such as 9 is > a fax, 8 is the answering machine, etc. > Splitting an area code doubles the number of phone number in an > geographic area, but this scheme would give you 9 times the numbers > (if only 1 DID digit were supported). > My personal view is that making decision in the CO of who or what you > want to talk at the phone company CI is less efficient, it consumes > phone numbers and local loop circuits needlessly. Making the decision > at the customer site is more efficient. Every member of my household > can have their own phone number (the default phone number is reserved > for telemarketers and goes directly to the answering machine!). > What's wrong with this scheme? Why are things being done this way? Larry, this system was designed in the 1940s, when home phones were a luxury, and other number-consuming devices weren't even a glimmer in their creator's minds. The numbering system is highly inefficient (a rural area with 400 phones consumes 10000 numbers, while cities that need it are forced into a split). Until people *EVERYWHERE* can be educated that their phone number is really 10 digits, and not seven, this splitting of hair(-sized area code)s will continue. John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/nexcomm ------------------------------ From: Javier Henderson Subject: Re: Area Code Splits - Why? Date: 29 Nov 1996 18:51:37 GMT Larry Lee wrote (): > If the phone company would extend DID into standard analog voice > lines, then we could go to Radio Shack and buy an extremely stupid > telehone switch ($100-$200 range) which would accept an additional > digit and route the call to 1 of 9 extensions (leaving extension 0 as > a default). This would allow homes/small businesses to have 10 > separate phone numbers with little to no phone company participation > in digits. I'm sure that popular conventions would arise such as 9 is > a fax, 8 is the answering machine, etc. ISDN more or less gives you that, though it still uses up numbers. But at least it doesn't use additional local loops, which is something you raised in your original posting, which I have trimmed down for brevity. Now, what would happen if we went with 8 digit phone numbers instead of new area codes? It would probably be more expensive to reprogram all the equipment to deal with 8 digits instead of 7 than with a new area code. javier ------------------------------ From: srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) Subject: Re: Area Code Splits - Why? Date: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 05:26:27 GMT Organization: InterLog Internet Services Reply-To: srdawson@interlog.com lclee@primenet.com (Larry Lee) wrote: > If the phone company would extend DID into standard analog voice > lines, then we could go to Radio Shack and buy an extremely stupid > telehone switch ($100-$200 range) which would accept an additional > digit and route the call to 1 of 9 extensions (leaving extension 0 as > a default). This would allow homes/small businesses to have 10 > separate phone numbers with little to no phone company participation > in digits. I'm sure that popular conventions would arise such as 9 is > a fax, 8 is the answering machine, etc. > Splitting an area code doubles the number of phone number in an > geographic area, but this scheme would give you 9 times the numbers > (if only 1 DID digit were supported). Isn't this how things are handled in Germany and Austria? The main number at the German subsidiary of the company I work for (Teklogix) for is +49 2154 9282 0, but the fax number is +49 2154 9282 59. The 0 and 59 are extension numbers. And I suspect that one of the reasons for lengthening the total number of digits allowed in a phone number from 12 to 15 (country code + area code + local number) at time 'T' is that German and Austrian numbers are becoming longer, with more extension digits, and the resulting string was longer than 12 digits ... ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: 30 Nov 1996 21:12:33 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Wow! I claimed that it was logically OK for a payphone operator and got a pile of flame mail, as well as various reasonable points raised. I will try an address these items in a coherent fashion, rather than crowding the newsgroup with a lot of snippets, those of others and my own. The following is a summary of the arguments used against deregulating payphones, and specifically against allowing payphones to charge for 800-numbers: 1) Payphone operators have a local monopoly at the site they are at, and should thus be regulated. 2) 800-access does not cost the payphone operators anything, except for opportunity costs, so why should the customer have to pay. 3) Payphones are obscenely profitable anyway, and they overcharge people. 4) Payphones should not be operated at a profit. 5) It usta be free, therefore it should always be free. Lastly, I will infer a number: 6) It is a public access issue and a fairness issue. People should not have to pay for 800 on some very general principle. I will address these items one by one: 1) Local monopoly: Maybe so, but the term monopoly is very flexible and the monopoly implied here is very narrow. Obviously a hot-dog stand is typically a _very_ local monopoly also. Using the term monopoly because something is often provided by a single vendor at one particular location is a very long stretch. By this token, corner grocery stores should be treated as big bad monopolists too! 2) 800-service does not cost the provider anything: Maybe so. The minor objection to this line of argument is that the "except for opportunity costs" can be a fairly major exception. The major objection is that it does not matter. By this token, the airlines should be FORCED to sell standby seats for a fistful of dollars, as their marginal cost for filling an empty seat given that they are flying the plane anyway is very low. The reality is of course that there are fixed costs in most operations, and the provider of a service has to spread these fixed costs over the user population somehow, to stay in business. Any one user might use the argument that HE should be in a privileged caste that only has to pay its marginal cost (for 800, this cost may be zero to a good approximation), and somebody else please pay the fixed cost. This is clearly untenable when extended! 3) Payphones are obscenely profitable and the payphone operators are ripping people off: Maybe true in some cases, but I do not have any hard numbers. I strongly suggest that payphone operation is like a lot of other businesses, where there are spots that are true cashcows, but that most payphones generate a modest rate of return. If not, we would see a building boom of payphones! What is probably true is that the people who do use payphones to dial long-distance often do get ripped-off, in a sense. There are several cures for this. If one believes in government regulation as a panacea for everything, then the answer is more regulation. Other, milder solutions is to either insist that all charges be clearly posted (I personally have little trouble with this mild form of regulation), or to raise public awareness. Another possibility is to allow_the_operators_ to_spread_their_charges_over_a_broader_customer_base, i.e. to specifically allow them to charge for everything, including 800! It is typical and obvious that if an entity is legally prohibited from raising revenue one way, it will in effect overcharge for something else! This is logically inevitable!!! 4) Payphones should not be operated at a profit: Hard to argue about normative issues. As a practical matter, without a profit motive, very few payphones will be provided. Some entities such as gas stations, might provide them as a service to their customers, but there will not be a lot of payphones. 5) It usta be free, therefore it should always be free: This is the entitlement argument in a nutshell. The first answer is why? Because you used to have a free ride does that somehow grandfather into a natural right to a free ride? Why so? A more specific observation is that under the old AT&T monopoly, the phone co did not care if the payphones made a profit by themselves, and certainly not whether they were used for 800, as they were owned by the same entity that collected the money for the 800 calls anyway. Another way of stating almost the same thing is that the phone company did a lot of cross-subsidizing, where long distance subsidised local phone service, payphones and just about everything else. Deregulation has brought great benefits, but you cannot cherry pick, and expect a lot of freebies AND get your long distance at a dime a minute (a quarter for international). 6) It is a public access issue and a fairness issue. People should not have to pay for 800 on some very general principle: There are several aspects to this. A common one is concern that "poor people cannot afford to pay and should be subsidised". For this to be true in this case, you would have to accept _all_ of three premises, a) Poor people should be subsidised, b) Pay phone service is a good instance of this, and c) 800-for-free is particularly likely to be used by poor people. Accepting a) is a matter of political philosophy. Some people would argue that that is what social programs, general relief, unemployment insurance and whatnot is for, and should not be a task for any particlular service provider. b) I see no particular reason. Lifeline service for a few bucks a month is available in most states, is this not enough? c) Even if one accepts the premise that poor people should have subsidised pay-phone service, it seems that free 800 is about the worst way to achieve this! AT&T 800 etc are typically used by telco adepts (like the readers of the newsgroup), who at least on average are far from poor! Really, guys, what you are saying is that telco adepts should be subsidised by everybody else, rich and poor alike! This is a truly humanitarian need!!! Let me finish by offering a compromise solution: Payphone operators be allowed to charge anything they like, for anything they like (except 911), but in return ALL CHARGES MUST BE CLEARLY POSTED! Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Payphone Deregulation Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 03:24:07 -0800 In article , nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) wrote: > In article , Telecom@Eureka.vip. > best.com (Linc Madison) writes: >> It seems that the sole purpose of payphone deregulation is to permit >> corporations that are already highly profitable to gouge the public for >> their own windfall profits. I say, to hell with all of them. > If it so damn profitable, why don't you do it? The whole theory that > somehow a privately owned corporation OWES some service to the public is > faulty. The only times it makes sense to impose such requirements are > 1) Imposing "public service" requirements in return for e.g. a monopoly, > or access to frequency space that is in some sense "public". > 2) To handle true emergencies. Thus, it makes perfect sense to require ANY > operator to allow 911 calls, under ALL circumstances. > As a practical argument, requiring unlimited 800 access will discourage a > lot of marginal phones and thus make them LESS available, not more! Utter and absolute HOGWASH!! I am not talking about IMPOSING any requirements, I am talking about LEAVING IN PLACE the situation under which every single COCOT now on America's street corners went into service. FACT: COCOT owners knew when they entered the business that they would have some non-revenue calls. FACT: Owning a COCOT is still very profitable, with a great many people entering the market. FACT: *CONTINUING* to require COCOTs to give free access to 800 numbers will not in any way reduce the availability of payphones from current levels. FACT: The direct cost to COCOT owners of providing free access to 800 numbers is ZILCH. Not one red cent. The only cost is "opportunity cost." Furthermore, even if we decide that there is some justification for providing revenue to payphone owners for calls that COST THEM NOTHING to provide, the proposed revenue level of $0.35 per call is absurdly exorbitant, off by at least a full order of magnitude. Very few calls on a COCOT generate 35 cents of profit to the payphone owner, but yet the COCOTs are doing just fine. The payphone owners are asking for an enormous government handout at the expense of the consumers, and the consumers will receive ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER in return. You call that fair?? Come on, people, let's all write our Congress-critters and get something done about this before it's too late. This FCC action must not be allowed to stand. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ From: sic102@york.ac.uk Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 11:31:01 GMT Subject: UK Changes in Codes November 28, 1996 I read with interest all the letters about changes in the US. Here in the UK they have just announced another national change (the lAst one was only 18 months ago), due primarily to the public rejecting overlays. London's two codes will be reunited (the fourth change in a decade), resulting in eight-figure customer numbers; twenty medium sized towns will move from 6 to 7 digits, whilst large businesses will have separate codes. The major change however, is that Wales and Northern Ireland will each have one code for each province, supposedly giving a national identity. Steven Collins sic102@york.ac.uk +44 1904 433300 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #639 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Dec 2 16:05:59 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA22673; Mon, 2 Dec 1996 16:05:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 16:05:59 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612022105.QAA22673@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #640 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Dec 96 16:05:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 640 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson When Local Numbers Dial Distant Shops (Greg Monti) Question Concerning 'Interconnect Charges' (Carlo Cernivani) 555 Numbers: Big Flop for Business (John Cropper) CID/SS7: Out-of-Area and Private on Same Call? (Stanley Cline) C-Kermit 6.0 and comp.dcom.telecom (Frank da Cruz) Church of Scientology Now Owns Cult Awareness Network Name (Danny Burstein) Modems in Countries Other Than North America (US & Canada) (Daniel Ritsma) Freemark Goes Out of Business (Chance Guyette) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 18:51:11 -0500 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: When Local Numbers Dial Distant Shops On 11 November 96, _The_Wall_Street_Journal_ published an article entitled, "When Local Numbers Dial Distant Shops." A summary: Herndon Florist in Herndon, Virginia, began getting complaint calls last year about flower orders that had not been delivered properly or on time. But they had never received nor handled these customers' orders in the first place. They had been handled by similarly-named "Florist in Herndon" and "Florist of Herndon", neither of which is located in Herndon. In fact, the two latter shops are the same shop, trading under the corporate name Nightmares, Inc., in Bernardsville, New Jersey. Nightmares uses Bell Atlantic's "remote call forwarding" service to provide itself a seven-digit local number in any community where it wants to do business. The calls are forwarded to their New Jersye office where operators are trained to answer the phone with the generic "Flower Shop." Nightmares has placed similar listings with remotely-forwarded numbers in a dozen states. It has 1,000 such listings in New Jersye alone, expanding its territory. Nightmares has been sued by ten local florists (all settled out of court) and investigated by five state attorneys-general (with nothing improper ever prosecuted). However, the Virginia legislature recently passed a law saying that it is illegal for a shop to misrepresent its location. Technically, Nightmares is in violation of this new law, but the comapny president says it is unconstitutional. In the meanitme, Herndon Florist has placed additional listings "Herndon Flowers Actually in Herndon" and "Florist of Herndon Actually in Herndon" in the Northern Virginia directory. Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: ccernivani@monmouth.com (Carlo Cernivani) Subject: Question Concerning 'Interconnect Charges' Date: 30 Nov 1996 04:02:01 GMT Organization: Monmouth Internet Not being versed in the world of telephony I'd like to get a little information. It's my understanding, and _please_ correct me if I'm wrong, that when a call is initiated on, say, the NYNEX network and is terminated on say, the BellSouth network NYNEX would have to pay BellSouth an interconnect or termination charge for completing this call. Now I've heard that this can be anywhere from 1.5 to 3 cents PER MINUTE. Is this true?? If it is, I ask what is there to prevent an ISP from purchasing their own phone switch and hitting up a NYNEX, MFS, etc. for these interconnect charges? Since ALL the traffic would be inbound the ISP would be paid for terminating every call. Are there legal, tariff, or other issues that would prevent an ISP from, in essence, becoming a peer of a NYNEX and therefore be entitled to these interconnect charges? Thanks very much in advance for any information you may be able to provide! Carlo Cernivani ccernivani@monmouth.com ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: 555 Numbers: Big flop for Business Date: Sun, 01 Dec 1996 11:46:01 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com From the Washington Post: The Prefix That Didn't Ring True To Those Who Dialed Into the Idea 2 Years Ago, 555- Has Been a Wrong Number By Mike Mills Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, November 30 1996; Page C01 The Washington Post It seemed like a can't-miss concept: From anywhere in the country, a person could pick up a phone and dial 555-TAXI to summon a cab. Or buy theater tickets through 555-SHOW. Or check 555-NEWS for the latest local headlines. Two years ago, a lot of entrepreneurs believed a whole new industry could be born with new 555 number combinations. No longer would the prefix be reserved solely for directory assistance, as in 555-1212. It might even eclipse today's multibillion-dollar toll-free 800 business, because people would find it easier to dial and remember seven digits than 10. But today, not a single commercial 555 service is in business. And many of those holding what they hoped were prize numbers -- digits that spell such marketable brand names as 555-AVIS, 555-XEROX or, yes, 555-POST -- now fear their magic numbers may end up being worthless. "I don't hold out a lot of hope that we'll ever get in business with this thing," said William Schwartz, owner of Xtend Communications Inc., a New York communications consulting company that has yet to use any of the five numbers it asked for, including 555-TAXI, 555-FILM and 555-SHOW. Schwartz and others blame local phone companies, saying they are unfairly balking at putting the numbers into service. With 800 numbers, a national database that all phone companies agreed to use was established. But people who hold the rights to the new 555 designations must persuade every local phone company in the country to program their computers to recognize their prize digits. Local phone companies counter that 555 proprietors are asking them to perform an expensive task of reprogramming their networks that will take time. "It is a good idea," said Wayne Swift, product manager for small business for Bell Atlantic Corp. "We've got a number of customers that want it, and we want to get it going. We're just having to drive through a lot of the technical issues first." The story begins in the early 1990s, when a few eager business owners across the country saw a way to compete against the Bells' directory assistance service and asked Bellcore, the Bells' research arm, to make other numbers with the 555 prefix available for commercial use. Bellcore agreed, and entrepreneurs quickly realized the numbers could be used not just for phone listings but also to hawk almost any service. Best of all was that, except for 555-1212, 555 numbers were unique for the entire country. That meant a seven-digit number dialed anywhere in the country could ring through to a single point. Thus a call to 555-NEWS could yield recorded news headlines. Or, from that single point, the call could be rerouted to anywhere in the country, providing the basis for a localized business. For example, if someone called 555-TAXI in Des Moines, a computer in New York could route the call to the caller's nearest local taxi company participating in the service. When Bellcore announced in March 1994 that it would hand out 555 numbers free on a first-come, first-served basis, there was an avalanche of interest. Individuals or companies were limited to five numbers each, though that rule was easily skirted by applicants who simply registered under multiple names to get more numbers. Today, about 2,200 numbers have been issued to roughly 500 companies, with hundreds of those numbers in dispute because they were claimed by more than one company. The Washington Post Co. applied for at least 29 numbers under the aegis of The Post Co., its television stations and its Digital Ink and Kaplan Educational Centers subsidiaries. Examples include 555-TEST for Kaplan and 555-WDIV for The Post's Detroit TV station. The Post now owns 555-POST outright after buying out four other companies that asked for the number. The Post Co. also wants 555-NEWS, the most sought-after number, along with 42 other contestants, including ABC News, MCI Communications Corp. and Cox Enterprises Inc. INFO, HELP and TAXI also have multiple claimants. Bellcore's pleas for applicants to work out disputes privately have largely failed. Now the Federal Communications Commission is weighing the possibility of putting the disputed numbers up for auction. The 555 entrepreneurs have a wide variety of business plans. Richard Bartel of Chevy Chase reserved dozens of 555 numbers, among them 555-RIDE, which he hopes to use as a nonprofit car-pooling service, and 555-AVIS and 555-HERTZ, which he hopes to sell to those car-rental firms. Thomas Hughes of Chevy Chase got control of 555-UFOS to create a national clearinghouse for UFO sightings. "It would be a free call," he said. David Lockwood, also of suburban Maryland, is a world championship tiddlywinks player lucky enough to snare 555-WINK. Should that number prove to be less than a cash cow, he also reserved 24 others, including 555-DOWJ. His wife, Deja, has 555-LORD. For interested rivals, 555-SATAN remains unclaimed. Then there is Hollywood, which has reserved an entire block of 555 numbers, ranging from 0100 to 0199. Scriptwriters long have used 555 for fictitious phone numbers in plots because using real numbers would subject their holders to crank calls. But studios now are seeing potential benefit in having characters exchange a 555 number that, if dialed, would reach a promotional line for the show. Some 555 fans say the Bell companies are delaying things until they are allowed into the long-distance business and can carry the calls. A new federal law gives them rights to enter that now-forbidden field in stages. Bell Atlantic's Swift disagrees. "I don't think that's what's holding this back at all," he said, citing heavy costs and time required for the reprogramming. Bell Atlantic is further along than most local companies in putting 555 into business. It is running a trial in the District along with the owners of 555-4RENT in which callers get apartment rental information (the call costs $5 after the first 15 seconds). By the end of January, he said, Bell Atlantic hopes to have toll-free local 555 services in operation, with pay services following in the middle of the year. Bell Atlantic also has its own plans for 555, having reserved 555-2000 and other numbers. For example, it is experimenting with a "reverse" directory service in New Jersey that gives names and addresses when people have only phone numbers. But Bell Atlantic warns that even when 555 numbers do come into service, they may have to have an area code in front of them. The Bells are pushing the concept of 10-digit dialing for all local numbers and say that for technical reasons, 555 numbers could not be exceptions. For now, the number holders continue waiting, complaining that deregulation has meant nobody is in charge of making sure that local phone companies cooperate. "There doesn't seem to be any central source of definitive information," said Bill Rozar, president of the Music Line in New York and a claimant for 555-SONG. "It was figuring prominently in our business plans when it first happened, but now it's just so hung up." Copyright 1996 The Washington Post Company John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 NiS / NexComm 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: CID/SS7: Out-of-Area and Private on Same Call? Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 02:30:34 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com Has anyone ever heard of getting "out-of-area" for CID, but having the privacy flag (normally set by dialing *67) set *for the same call to the same number*? (This means if ACR is active on a line, getting the "blocked" recording, but if ACR is INactive, getting "out-of-area" on CID?) Case in question: I called from a payphone in a nearby area to my parents, who have "Block-the-Blocker" (anonymous call rejection) enabled, using my VoiceNet calling card (800 access number and LEC payphone, so no COCOT programming involved.) Well, when I called them they didn't answer, but I got the recording: "Your call has been properly delivered, but the party you are trying to reach is not accepting calls from callers who have blocked delivery of their telephone number..." I thought this VERY unusual, as I had NOT dialed *67 prior to calling, and VoiceNet normally sends "out-of-area" for CID info! I called MY number (where I do NOT have anon call reject) and when I got home later, the CID box showed "out-of-area". Confused, I tried calling my parents using the same card from my cellular phone, another payphone, and my own line. In every single case, I got the "blocked" recording -- but if I called my number I got "out-of-area" on my CID box. I finally turned ACR off on their line (we live in the same house) and called from my line, and lo and behold, "out-of-area" showed up on CID. But when I turned ACR back on, I started getting the "blocked" recording again. Apparently VoiceNet (or Econophone, who provides VoiceNet's switching), or NYNEX (their end), BellSouth (my end, either in Atlanta or Chattanooga), or MCI (apparently VN/EP's underlying carrier), has messed up SS7 translation *somewhere* and is sending out the privacy flag *along with* empty CID information ...?! (Yes, I am calling them tomorrow about this ...) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Frank da Cruz) Subject: C-Kermit 6.0 and comp.dcom.telecom Date: 1 Dec 1996 21:52:00 GMT Organization: Columbia University A while back I posted some questions related to construction of a "portable dialing directory" to this newsgroup, and received a lot of high-quality advice. In case any of you would like to see the result, it's in the newly released C-Kermit 6.0 communications software package for UNIX, VMS, AOS/VS, and other platforms. You can read all about it on, and download it from, the Web at: http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ck60.html There is an entire chapter devoted to its dialing and telephony aspects in the new edition of "Using C-Kermit" (Digital Press, 1997, ISBN 1-55558-164-1), which also contains passages from the ensuing correspondence (properly attributed, with permission, of course), and a paragraph in the Acknowledgements (and to Pat for running such a valuable service). By the way, the same features are in Kermit 95 for Windows 95 and NT: http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/k95.html To summarize briefly (quoting from the Web page): The biggest change in version 6.0 concerns modems and dialing. In version 6.0, C-Kermit supports: . Automatic repeated dialing (no scripts required) . Multistage dialing . Credit-card dialing . Dialing beepers, numeric pagers, and alpha pagers . Incoming modem calls (ANSWER command) . More built-in modem types . Flexible configuration of additional modem types But most significant is the new dialing directory and in C-Kermit's understanding of telephone numbers. The version 5A dialing directory couldn't have been simpler -- a single file that Kermit searched for a name and, if found, replaced it with the associated phone number and dialed it, literally, exactly as found. Version 6.0 supports multiple simultaneous dialing directories, multiple (thousands, even) entries under the same name (so, for example, if the first number is busy, Kermit immediately goes on to the second number, etc), and most of all, a thorough understanding of dialing procedures: country codes, area codes, toll-free calling, calling cards, PBXs, and lots more. This new knowledge about telephone numbers, in turn, allows "cheapest-first" dialing when multiple numbers are fetched from the dialing directory, and it allows dialing directories to be "portable" -- that is, the same entry can be dialed from anywhere -- local, long-distance, international, etc. (end quote) Thanks again to those of you who helped out. Frank [TELEOCM Digest Editor's Note: I am glad the readers of the Dgiest were able to help you. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 08:44:08 EST From: Danny Burstein Subject: Church of Scientology Now Owns Cult Awareness Network Name The "Cult Awareness Network" was one of the groups fighting the Scientologists. They were brought to court. And lost. Big. What troubles me is that the former CAN name and phone listings have now been, as a result of a court decision, purchased by the Scientologists. Meaning that someone who is trying to call them for help is, well, ... you can guess... (Let me emphasize that I'm _not_ proposing that one side or the other is good or bad in the original fight. I just think it's kind of sad that our legal system perpetuates this specific type of result) ------------------------------ [from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/digest/nat2.htm] Scientologists Behead Cult Awareness Network By Laurie Goodstein Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, December 1, 1996; Page A01 (brief excerpts follow) "One high-stakes suit, handled by a lawyer who has frequently represented the church, succeeded, and a jury ordered CAN to pay as much as $1.8 million. The group filed for bankruptcy. Now CAN's assets are up for sale, and last week its name, logo, Post Office box and telephone number were finally sold to the highest bidder: a Los Angeles lawyer named Steven L. Hayes, who is a Scientologist. Hayes says he is working with a group of people "united in their distaste for CAN" who plan to reopen the group so it "disseminates the truth about all religions." "It kind of boggles the mind," said David Bardin, an attorney who has represented CAN in Washington. "People will still pick up the CAN name in a library book and call saying, "My daughter has joined the Church of Scientology." And your friendly CAN receptionist is someone who works for Scientology." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I really have to respond by saying there should be a plague on both of their houses. The Cult Awareness Network was located here in the northern Illinois area; as I recall one of the primary people involved was Cynthia Kessler (?), and they always seemed to me to be very bigoted and close-minded about any religion which did not fall pretty closely to the mainstream Christian way of thinking about things. By their definition of things, the very early Christians were in a 'cult'. I am not really sorry to see them gone. There was no room for anyone in their organization who marched to any sort of different drummer as the saying goes. But to have them toppled by Scientology is really a bizzare turn of events. Scientology was started about 1949 by L. Ron Hubbard, at the time a writer of science fiction books. At a speech he gave to a group of authors at a convention about that time, he jokingly (it seemed at the time, although later it was clear that he was not joking) said, if you really want to Make Money Fast, you don't want to write books; you want to start a church. He was absolutely correct. A very popular philosophical movement early in this century was known as Christian Science (which still has a number of adherents) and by the 1930-40 era when Christian Science was at its peak, there were a number of imitators who came along with variations on that name who intended to make the big gobs of money Mary Baker Eddy had harvested on the original 'product' which dated back to 1879. Among them was a fellow in Chicago named Carleton Whitehead who started a philosophy known as 'Religious Science'. Without any Usenet newsgroups or email spam to help him, he made a lot of money also. L. Ron Hubbard was not unaware of how a little bit of pseudo-science could go a long way when combined with a religious aura to fleece the public. People then and now were/are quite anxious to find other people to provide them with (to their way of thinking) satisfactory answers and solutions to the problems they face. Including the word 'science' or some variation of it in the group name made a lot of sense. It was something which demanded respect and would surely bring prestige. I feel rather certain that L. Ron Hubbard had the success of the various 'science' movements as they were applied religiously in the 1930-50's in mind when he chose the name Scientology for his own church. Actually, his book on the topic came first. His book, 'Dianetics: the Modern Science of Mental Health' was published (and has sold millions of copies over the past fifty years) first, and the church was started as a further expansion of that. This was quite similar to what happened with Mary Baker Eddy whose book 'Science and Health With Key to the Scriptures' was an immediate best seller at the time of publication. She then began her church with her reading audience as her congregation. Mr. Hubbard did okay. He died a very rich man a number of years ago, but the Church of Scientology continues to prosper. Like Mrs. Eddy, he left most of his money to the church when he died. Also like Mrs. Eddy while he was alive there were legal problems with family members and and others who wanted to see him declared incompetent, and/or a charlatan trying to rip off the public. As she was, he was also the winner. If I am not mistaken, I think Cynthia Kessler and a couple of her friends started the Cult Awareness Network after an earlier run-in with Hubbard's bunch a number of years ago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Daniel P. Ritsma Subject: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (US & Canada) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 1996 13:30:20 -0500 My colleagues and I travel quite a bit for work and pleasure to Europe. Every time I go there I have problems setting up modem correctly. After a couple of tries these appear the issues I am dealing with. In some countries use line monitoring devices (supposedly UK and Germany), in some countries I can't dial (I can open the line but dialing no-way) and in some countries I can't even open the line. I have good experiences with Hong-Kong (I know this is not Europe). What is the story here? If there are frequency differences are international Telco's (or the ITU for that matter) working on synchronizing equipment and frequencies? Or will this be our problem forever? What is the solution? I have heard about the international modems but supposedly that are just modems with different plugs so I can get them plugged in everywhere? If I should go for an international modem which brand? Filled with questions but hungry for answers. Thanks a lot, Sincerely Yours, Daniel Ritsma ------------------------------ From: Chance Guyette Subject: Freemark Goes Out of Business Date: Sun, 01 Dec 1996 18:02:17 -0500 Organization: CyberGate, Inc. Reply-To: trakl.@geocities.com Hello People, I was a Freemark customer, I got a notice this morning from them saying as of Dec. 1 they will no longer be in business. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #640 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Dec 2 17:44:57 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA03977; Mon, 2 Dec 1996 17:44:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 17:44:57 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612022244.RAA03977@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #641 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Dec 96 17:44:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 641 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "ISDN: A Closer Look" by Bellcore (Rob Slade) VPN Rates on the Way Down (Adam Gaffin) New York MFS Intelenet Down (Timothy D. Hunt) Radio B-92 Struggles be Heard (Veran Matic) Three Business Days to do ... What? (birchall@email.njin.net) COCOT 800-Access Charges; Questions and Analysis (Zhahai Stewart) A Correction on the Nazi Newsgroup Message (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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 02 Dec 1996 10:35:17 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "ISDN: A Closer Look" by Bellcore CBISDNCL.RVW 960829 "ISDN: A Closer Look (ver. 2.1)", Bellcore, 1996, 1-57305-001-6, U$395.00 %A Bellcore %C Room 3A184, 8 Corporate Place, Piscataway, NJ 08854 %D 1996 %G 1-57305-001-6 (LP-YIT-BT) %I Bellcore %O U$395.00 +1-800-521-CORE +1-908-699-5800 fax: +1-908-336-2559 %O llavoie@notes.cc.bellcore.com mgordon2@notes.cc.bellcore.com %T "ISDN: A Closer Look (ver. 2.1)" This computer based training package offers a quick introduction to, and overview of, ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network). It is aimed at the user, manager, or a technical worker who needs to do a one time installation. Technical specifications are there, but not right down to a bitstream level. The material is reliable, the text is sparse but clear, and the graphics and animation are well chosen to aid in getting the concepts across. However, this program is still very little more than a "page turner". There are end of chapter (or section) questions for self testing, but the queries really only check for repetition of the text, rather than understanding of the concepts. (Indeed, taken out of context, as they appear in the question sections, the "answers" sometimes make very little sense.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 CBISDNCL.RVW 960829. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associted publications. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | "Power users think Institute for rslade@vcn.bc.ca | 'Your PC is now Research into rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | Stoned' is part of User Rob_Slade@mindlink.bc.ca | the DOS copyright Security Canada V7K 2G6 | line." R. Murnane ------------------------------ From: agaffin@nww.com (Adam Gaffin) Subject: VPN Rates on the Way Down Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 16:42:26 GMT Organization: Network World Fusion VPN rates on the way down By David Rohde Network World, 12/2/96 Long-distance carriers have become embroiled in an all-out bidding contest that is driving down negotiated virtual private network (VPN) rates to as low as 5 cents a minute - at least for customers willing to hand over voice and data traffic to one carrier. The carriers are apparently spooked not only by the prospect of competition from local exchange carriers, but also by the dramatic emergence of voice telephony over packet data networks. ''The nickel minute is here,'' exulted Washington, D.C.-based user attorney Hank Levine, speaking at a Communications Managers Association convention in New York. Amazingly, the bidding war on new contracts is taking place in the face of ongoing price increases on existing contracts. For example, on Thanksgiving Day, AT&T raised most of its business rates on regular tariffs by 4.8%. Analysts described the resulting whipsaw effect as one that dramatically favors users that move to renegotiate their telecom deals while hurting those who stand pat. -------------------- You can get the complete report, along with related hyperlinks, on Network World Fusion (http://www.nwfusion.com). Enter 5212 in the DocFinder box on the main page (If you haven't used NWFusion before, you'll have to register first, but it's free and, once in, you can bookmark pages and not have to log in again). Adam Gaffin Online Editor, Network World agaffin@nww.com / (508) 820-7433 ------------------------------ From: timh@usa.net (Timothy D. Hunt) Subject: New York MFS Intelenet Down Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 18:57:37 GMT Organization: Fusion Systems Group, Inc. Reply-To: timh@usa.net Are there any New York MFS Intelenet users on this list. Our service has been out all morning, apparently because of a switch crash last night, and I'm curious to see how many other people have also been affected. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please provide an update when one is available. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Dec 96 18:16 GMT From: Veran Matic Subject: Radio B-92 Struggles to be Heard Another "Jamming Device" Activated Against Radio B92 The single independent medium in Belgrade, Radio B92, has been continuously jammed since the demonstrations in major Serbian cities began gathering steam a week ago. More than 200,000 demonstrators continue to protest throughout Serbia every day. Today, Dec 1, 1996 the situation has taken yet another turn for the worse as an extremely strong transmitter has been activated on a frequency which Radio B92 uses to broadcast its programs. That is why the programs of B92 can be heard only in about 40% of Belgrade's territory. Since the revolt expressed by the demonstrators who are protesting for the fourteenth day in a row against the theft of their votes by Milosevic's regime has grown more vigorous and determined, more radical methods of repression might be expected. We are particularly concerned about the growing possibility of a forcible police take-over of Radio B92. Despite all the threats we've received so far, the journalists of Radio B92 continue with their professionally impeccable reporting on the latest developments in Belgrade and elsewhere, and the Radio itself has become an unofficial press center for an unprecedented number of foreign correspondents who are in Belgrade these days. Reactions of the institutes dealing with human rights and the freedom of expression are still not very numerous, however. Counter-actions to the regime's attempts at repression have been taken, so that the police force in Belgrade is now facing the jamming of their own communication devices. Here are the fax numbers to which you can send your notes of protest and support: President Slobodan Milosevic -381-11-684-679 Minister for Information Aleksandar Tijanic -381-11-685-937 Coalition "Together" - Organizers of the Protest -381-11-322-8890 Our news service 'Odraz B92' will continue to be broadcast on the Internet in spite of a possible ban on Radio B92. Veran Matic, Editor in Chief tel: +381-11-322-9922 Radio B92, Belgrade, Yugoslavia fax: +381-11-324-8075 Radio B92 Official Web Site --- http://www.opennet.org/ ------------------------------ From: birchall@email.njin.net Subject: Three Business Days to do ... What? Date: 2 Dec 1996 10:37:00 -0500 Organization: Rutgers University For the last couple years, my wife and I have lived in an apartment in one of two adjacent converted old row-houses. Phone lines are below the street in our town, and as far as I know, there's a single entry point for both buildings - there's certainly a single entry point for us humans. :) Each apartment has (and has had for years) a pair run to it, with two jacks. Recently, a larger apartment became available on the other side of the combined building (one of our noisy neighbors finally moved out ;), and we jumped at the chance to move. The local power and gas utility was able to switch the gas and electric in the new apartment into our name, and switch that in the old apartment out of our name, in seconds. Feeling optimistic, I called our LEC, Bell Atlantic-NJ. After numerous busy signals and one call that *almost* made it to a live person before being interrupted by a bunch of strange beeps, I reached one of their "consultants" (when did customer service reps suddenly become consultants? doesn't the word "consultant" imply a *little* bit more expertise? :) who told me that they wouldn't be able to get our phone number moved over to the pair for the new apartment until Thursday. Three business days to do... what? The apartment was occupied recently, so the pair should be in fairly good repair (bad pun, I know), and I highly doubt we'll see anyone from BANJ in our neighborhood this week. As far as I can figure, all they really need to do tell their computer that NXX-8023 no longer goes to ye olde pair, but rather to the new one. Anybody know what sort of stuff BANJ is likely to be doing (or not doing) that will take them three days? I'm a little disappointed, but mostly just curious. ------------------------------ From: zstewart@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Zhahai Stewart) Subject: COCOT 800-Access Charges; Questions and Analysis Date: 1 Dec 1996 17:41:47 -0700 Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Sigh. It's hard to get a balanced description of the COCOT 800 number charges pros and cons. One recent summary which ostensibly made some attempt was unfortunately framed with a strong agenda: charges are OK. For example: > If one believes in government regulation as a panacea > for everything, then the answer is more regulation. Since I know nobody who self identifies with believing that government regulation is a panacea for everything, this is a null statement, a rhetorical ploy. A fair statement without wife-beating-terminated-yet? presuppositions would be: "If one believes that government regulation is sometimes useful, then one can discuss whether or not this is one of those situations". Then it's not so summarily dismissed, and we actually have to *think* about the specific merits, rather than be herded by generalities. (Interestingly, the poster favored regulated free 911 access, without thinking this implies he believes regulation is a panacea; all I would ask it that the rest of be allowed similar respect). One side assumes that COCOT operators need to prove something in order to change the status quo. The other assumes that COCOT operators should be able to charge anything they want, absent the other side proving something. Since "proof" which is acceptable to the biased party is darn hard to find, it's not surprising that each may tend to win, if allowed to frame the discussion in their terms and with their assumptions. Instead, let's start with a level playing field. Which factors favor COCOT charges for 800 numbers, and which do not? Equal burden of evidence, with no presumption either way. Q: Is there typically a competitive market in COCOTs, in the sense that a COCOT charging more for 800 access is likely to see effective competition from another one charging less - IN THE REAL WORLD? If so, in the absense of collusion or monopoly, the competitive model is likely to operate well, and there could be no need for ANY government regulation of 800# access charges. If not, then *perhaps* there continues to be room to examine the option of government regulation, whether it is to make 800 # access free, or to set a limit of X cents (eg: 35). If we accept that government mandated limits of 35 cents are philosophically acceptable, then limits of 0 cents or 10 cents or two dollars are at least open for discussion, without any rants about regulatory panaceas. Q: Does 800 access impose a substantial cost on COCOT owners? If so, then there would need to be a solid rationale for imposing any rate limit substantially less than this cost. If not, then the question is still open (it makes free access more reasonable, but does not mandate it). The "opportunity costs" argument would, I think, need some examination. Do we count local and non-800 number access which is lost (say, somebody needing to make a paid call who goes to another phone, because a given COCOT payphone is occupied with an 800 caller)? Or do we count the lost opportunity to make extra profits by steering a call to a more expensive LD carrier? I suggest only the former is relevant here. Q: Is the present payphone business unprofitable, or marginal, such that the public good is harmed by a lack of availability; and such that raising 800 access charges would make payphones substantially more available? If so, this would argue in favor of raising the access rates (to be balanced against other factors; otherwise we could just raise the limit almost arbitrarily, so long as even one additional COCOT payphone was installed thereby). If not, then there is less incentive to raise the charges. Q: Does free 800 access advance any public good? For example, effectively increasing fair competition in long distance services, or allowing better access to toll-free public services (eg: encouraging calls which are considered beneficial to the public good, which otherwise might not be made)? If so, this would weigh in towards lower or zero cost. If not, then there would be little justification for downward pressure on access charges. Q: Is something broken which needs fixing? Is there currently a real problem (too few payphones, COCOTs going out of business, unfair subsidies, dysfunctional competitive market producing bad results)? If so, then we have a clear need to be looking for solutions, including possibly raising charges for 800 access. If not, then there is less pressure to change things, and arguments for change should revolve around how things could be made even better than the currently working system. We're not going to get binary, definitive answers to these, and the above is not a flow chart with fixed conclusions once you plug in the answers. But we need to at least look at all sides equally, to have the objective inputs needed to make a good judgement call (rather than stretching as far as possible to justify a predetermined conclusion). Here is my analysis: It has been argued that saying free access to 800 numbers from payphones is a reasonable requirment since incremental costs are so low, would be equivalent to saying: > airlines should be FORCED to sell standby seats for a fistful of > dollars, as their marginal cost for filling an empty seat given that > they are flying the plane anyway is very low. The big cost there is that people would wait for the cheap seats rather than pay full fare. This is a bad analogy thereby. It is closer to an argument for why COCOTs should be allowed to PROHIBIT all 800 access (as airlines have the option of selling no standby's), rather than being required to provide it at cost-related rates (as COCOTs might be forced to provide 800 access for 35 cents, the equivalent of your fistful of dollars). Is that what you are really arguing? That given the airline analogy, COCOTs should have the option of allowing no 800 access at all, since airlines need sell no standby seats at all (in each case, to project their higher prices from erosion)? > The reality is of course that there are fixed costs in most operations, > and the provider of a service has to spread these fixed costs over the > user population somehow, to stay in business. Of course. In a partially regulated environment like telephony, however, there are sometimes limits on how they can do so. We are discussing the appropriate limits. This is also true of, say, residential service rates. But the fact that fixed costs have to be distributed *somehow* doesn't really provide much guidance on whether the public and private interests are best served by any given distribution. Unless one thinks that non-regulation is a panacea for everything, in which case the foregone answer is "no regulation, ever". "Let's just allow COCOTs to distribute their fixed costs any way they wish". Guess what, they have an incentive to load 800 access with a disproportionate amount of the fixed charge, so as to make access to free market LD suppliers less affordable and keep people using the ripoff LD vendor. They know this, we shouldn't be naive. >> It usta be free, therefore it should always be free: > This is the entitlement argument in a nutshell. This trivializes the actual arguments presented (as well as imputing illiteracy to those who would advance said arguments). One form of it was: All existing COCOTs got into the business under the present terms of free 800-access. The proposed charges for 800 access represent a new sweetening of the deal, a unilateral shift in favor of the COCOTs, with no balancing. Some could see this not unlike people buying houses near an airport (private or public) then demanding that the noise be decreased. If one is going to throw around "entitlement" so loosely, we can also ask why the COCOTs are now inherently "entitled" to get money for 800 numbers but not for 911 numbers? Better still, let's avoid that overly politically charged "e" buzzword and stick to the facts. Regarding the charges that COCOT operators may be making "obscene" profits by ripping off consumers, one poster says that may in some cases be true, but suggests as a solution: > Another possibility is to allow_the_operators_to_spread_their_charges_ > over_a_broader_customer_base, i.e. to specifically allow them to charge > for everything, including 800! Um, this doesn't reduce obscene profits. Even at best, it just redistributes the source, ASSUMING the local call rate or captive LD phone rates would drop in correspondence to the new revenue from 800 access charges. But is there even one person here who believes this "best case" scenario will really happen? That the "fixed costs" for COCOTs will be redistributed by charging LESS for local calls once they charge MORE for 800 access? Or is this a bogus argument? Will the real result be that COCOTs will charge as much as ever on local calls, AND then make even more profits on 800 access charges in addition? Hardly a "solution". Or consider the big "ripoff" of COCOTs - using higher priced "kickback" LD suppliers by default. Does anybody think that charging more for access to the competitive market LD suppliers via 800 numbers is going to result in COCOTs *lowering* the cost of their captive LD suppliers? No, I think it'll just put the free market LD suppliers at more of a disadvantage, and make it easier for the ripoff LD supplier to charge a bit MORE (at least 35 cents more even for just additive rather than ratiometric parity with the present situation). That is, rather than redistribution of fixed costs lowering captive LD as 800-based free market LD goes up by 35 cents, more likely BOTH options will if anything increase in cost. Again, what "solution" is this to ripoffs or excessive profit squeezing? > It is typical and obvious that if an entity is legally prohibited from > raising revenue one way, it will in effect overcharge for something > else! This is logically inevitable!!! No, it's not. Does prohibiting telcos from charging more for loud conversations than for quiet ones mean they inevitably have to "overcharge" for voice-level-independent service? I suppose it can, IF YOU GET TO CONTROL THE DEFINITION OF "OVERCHARGE" ANY WAY YOU PLEASE. But there are a great number of logically defensible ways to define the "proper charge" and cost distribution, and thus implicitly define "overcharge". And perhaps more importantly, this is not a reversible function. The real question would be: If they are allowed to charge more for X, will they pass on the saving by lowering rates for Y, or just keep Y the same and make higher profits? That is, is it "typical and obvious that if an entitity is legally ALLOWED to raise revenue one way, it will in effect cease to overcharge for something else" as a logical inevitability? THAT is the question here -- we are not talking about switching from 800 charges to no 800 charges and debating whether COCOTs would have to raise local access charges after the change, but the reverse. If your "overcharge" argument is right, it is a logical inevitablity that COCOTs are *currently* overcharging for local service (they have no choice, they don't get to distribute fixed costs over 800 access). But any increase in the charge for 800 access, thus letting them distribute overhead to same, should be balanced by a reduction in the charges for local service, which then no longer needs to be overcharged. Right? Not so reducing local call charges would constitute a give-away to the COCOT, a double subsidy of the fixed costs. Something tells me you won't buy this, and that it'll turn out that 25 cents for a local call isn't an overcharge after all, and need not be reduced when 800 access goes from 0 to 35 cents. Logical inevitablities? Or arguments of convenience, to be forgotten once the rates for LD access go up? > Let me finish by offering a compromise solution: Payphone operators be > allowed to charge anything they like, for anything they like (except > 911), but in return ALL CHARGES MUST BE CLEARLY POSTED! Seems like a "compromise" rather biased towards the COCOTs. On the one hand, we'd give COCOTs absolute and total control over pricing (except 911, hardly a volume leader), which is basically the whole shebang, the big apple, the max possible gain for their side. And in return for this maximal concession, what similarly valuable thing do they give up? They will finally honestly post the charges (costing them effectively zilch percent of overhead)? Sorry, this sounds like almost-unconditional surrender, except we'll let the opposing soldiers keep their uniforms. (Note that I don't question your right to advocate such surrender, I just question calling it a "compromise"). "Charging whatever they want" is also equivalent to eliminating any free market LD option. "Sure, you can use 1-800-CALL-ATT rather than our $1/min captive carrier, but we'll charge you a $1/minute fee for accessing that particular 800 number". Whoopee, what a bonanza for fairness and competition. While we're at it, let's let LEC's surcharge whatever they wish for dial one access to any but their choice of LD companies, and gut the whole free market LD reform of recent years -- why go halfway? Meanwhile, I see no reason that COCOTs should not be required to post their rates IN ANY CASE, with or without 35 cent charges for 800 access, much less total surrender. It would cost them no significant direct cost, and the only indirect cost might be loss of some revenue-from-deception. It would foster freer and more open competition and a more informed market. It would somewhat empower consumers to make individual decisions better, rather than having any regulatory agency make them. There is almost no downside whatsoever, and a considerable upside. It harms no legitimate private interest. And I see no need to "compensate" COCOTs for being honest (much less give away the farm to them), any more than canners need to be "compensated" for giving accurate net weights. HOWEVER, if and after such truth-in-labeling (or anything else) turned out to foster an effective real world competitive market, like competing COCOT phones often showing up at the local 7-11 with open price competition, I would seriously consider reducing the regulation. Not to "compensate" them for being honest, but because it would be less neccessary. But until the market becomes more competitive, well ... buying pigs in pokes is not my forte. Here's a more limited compromise I'd suggest. If COCOTs are allowed to charge for 800 access, make it an *enforceable* requirement that they do so, without restriction. A user who can demonstrate that a COCOT has blocked any 800 number will be allowed to collect $500, not unlike the telephone and fax junk call disincentives. Hopefully a few bounty hunters would find it profitable to trim the COCOT herd of its stragglers, without harming the above board ones at all. And another proposal. Make 35 cents (or whatever) the *maximum* they can charge, and track the actual charges. When actual charges drop below this maximum, and COCOTs are competing on price, we can turn increasing amounts of control from regulation to competition. Since the incremental cost of 800 calls is zilch, there is LOTS of room for easy competition. If the prices stay pegged at 35 cents, then competition probably isn't yet operating well; maybe COCOTs rarely put phones close enough to give people a choice, or they don't post their charges, or whatever. This is a balanced approach, neither "regulate everything" nor "deregulate everything" - rather, "regulate only when competition isn't working, but prefer competition when it does work" -- based on some real world feedbacks rather than ivory tower theories (like "logical inevitabilities"). Zhahai ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: A Correction on the 'Nazi Newsgroup' Message Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 15:30:00 EST Would it help to say that message last week on voting pro/con regards the establishment of a Nazi newsgroup on Usenet was a typographical error? I got the message from Judith Oppenheimer who is a pretty regular reader/participant in this Digest and based on that I ran it without any further checking. By and large I have to rely on what people tell me here; fact-checking is unfortunatly a luxury there is little time for. I know that sounds terrible, and maybe in the next revision of what I do here (some day, somehow) that will change. I've an idea it is going to have to become part of things here, even if the end result is fewer Digests/messages going out. The entire net is getting like that lately. Anyway, the Nazi newsgroup message was *out of date* -- by several months. It appears the topic was debated extensively last spring, and the vote was held several months ago as well. ... and in my haste to publish it, I did not read it very carefully or I would have also noticed the *April, 1996* reference given in the message being passed along. Matthew Landry and others have written to me in the past few days saying the 'Nazi newsgroup' message is fast becoming a Craig Shergold type thing: everyone reads it, has a knee-jerk reaction and passes it along unwittingly. Trying to be helpful no doubt, as I was, but none the less adding to the never-ending stream of spam and other useless and ignorant messages on the net. Please erase it from your spools, and whatever you do do not pass it along any further. I feel properly chastised for having sent it out in the first place. Incidentally, when the vote was held several months ago the NO votes won, by a huge (in the millions of votes) margin. There is no Nazi newsgroup as a result. Again, sorry. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #641 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Dec 3 08:39:14 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA00930; Tue, 3 Dec 1996 08:39:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 08:39:14 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612031339.IAA00930@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #642 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Dec 96 08:39:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 642 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson _Wired_ Article on Undersea Cables (Greg Monti) ATT Enters Japan-US "Callback" Market (oldbear@arctos.com) Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Question Concerning 'Interconnect Charges' (John R. Levine) Announcement: New Low-Noise Cryptography Mailing List (Monty Solomon) Announcing New Telecom Web Page (John D. Cropper) Re: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (John R. Levine) Re: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (W. Halverson) Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts (Jim Jacobs) Re: Integretel Again (Stanley Cline) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 02 Dec 1996 23:11:32 -0500 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: _Wired_ Article on Undersea Cables The cover story in the December, 1996, issue of _Wired_ magazine is on undersea cables, entitled "Mother Earth, Motherboard" by Neal Stephenson. Specifically, it is about the FLAG (Fiber Link Around Globe) cable venture, which runs from the United Kingdom to China, Japan and Korea. The route is all undersea except for major land crossings at Egypt and Thailand. The title refers to the concept that the earth is now a large computer and cables like FLAG are but traces on its circuit board. Some highlights (although they won't do this lengthy "hacker tourist" travelogue justice): 1. FLAG is one inch in diameter and 28,000 kilometers long. It will be finished in September, 1997. It will carry 5.3 Gigabits per second per fiber pair. There are two fiber pairs in the cable. 2. Undersea repeaters are actually laser transmitters and receivers, each of which draw 0.9 amperes at about 10,000 volts DC. The 10 kV is carried on a single copper tube conductor. The ocean serves as the return circuit to ground. 3. Only a handful of companies know how to make cable like this: the main players: AT&T, KDD and Alcatel. Only another handful know how to lay it: AT&T and Cable & Wireless Marine. C&W did most of FLAG. 4. FLAG is being financed as a for-profit business outside the usual closed "club" of government-owned PTTs and AT&T. A group of investors and entrepreneurs led by the U.S. regional Bell company Nynex, are running the show. The main office is in Bermuda because it's a corporate tax haven. The cable itself runs nowhere near Bermuda. At least two of the traditional "club" carriers (Korea Telecom and KDD) got in on the deal when they figured what they were missing. Japan will have two landings of FLAG, one at a KDD facility, one at an IDC facility. 5. Sample conversation overheard in a saloon near the route: "How much does one of those satellite phones cost, anyway?" "Who gives a shit." 6. The cable is buried a few feet in the seabed over most of its route, even in deep water. This minimizes anchor and trawler snags. 7. The most difficult subject to master in undersea cable laying is slack. It's an art, not completely a science. As a ship pays out cable, it may not touch the ocean floor until a point 30 km behind the ship, 8 km below the surface. The crew needs to know what the bottom looks like there so that the cable is not suspended between two rocks or ridges. A survey is done using a fan pattern of sonar beams, quantified and databased on a Sparcstation on board ship. 8. A well-laid cable has about one percent slack (because each kilometer costs between $16,000 and $28,000). In fact, there is so little slack that the cable cannot be pulled up off the ocean floor intact. If a repeater (or the cable itself) fails, the cable is snipped by a submarine robot, the two ends are pulled to the surface, and a new piece is inserted. The resulting loop of cable is carefully laid out and charted alongside the main route. It is the responsibility of all other ships to avoid snagging any charted cable. 9. At Porthcurno, near Land's End in southwestern England, there's a Museum of Submarine Telegraphy and a pub called "The Cable Station - Free House." Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 17:10:42 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: ATT Enters Japan-US "Callback" Market AT&T OFFERS CALL-BACK SERVICES TO CALLERS IN JAPAN Since long-distance phone rates are more competitive in the U.S. than in Japan, a call from the U.S. to Japan costs less than a call from Japan to the U.S. In order to compete for the Japan-U.S. phone business, AT&T is offering a "call-back" service that will give corporate customers in Tokyo an automatic dialer that will recognize a call from Japan and, in a single step, return the call immediately. An executive of KDD, Japan's principal international telephone company, says the approach is "unfair" but acknowledges that it is not illegal. AT&T had itself once fought against call-back services, but decided to adopt them after both the United Nations and the U.S. Federal Communications Commission declared the service legal, which meant that AT&T's competitors would be offering them. source: New York Times November 28, 1996 page C15 via edupage ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 17:25:12 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: *69 Now Giving Some LD Numbers Here in BellSouth territory, *69 (1169) has been giving a 'quote' of the last incoming call's number (in full ten-digits) as well as time and date for some years now. But it only gave the quote if SS7 connectivity was involved *or* if the ANI was 'converted' to SS7 by the carrier on a long distance call (a-la Wiltel, prior to the FCC's inter-state/LATA Caller-ID order late last year), to the inward BellSouth switch. i.e. if the number could show up on a Caller-ID box, I could get a 'quote' by doing *69 (1169). This is good in the situation where I am on the phone and get a Call-Waiting beep tone. Presently, I don't have Call-Waiting-Deluxe, and I'm not sure if Bell has implemented it in my local #1AESS switch, yet. ("Call-Waiting-Deluxe" is the ADSI-based Caller-ID-on-a-call- waiting-beep). If another call doesn't beep in on a call in progress, I can do *69 (1169) to get a quote back on that (last) incoming beeping call, as long as complete SS7 (or something similar) was involved in the connection. I still get "out-of-area" calls on my Caller-ID box, as well as the message: "We're sorry, but Touch*Star (tm) service cannot be used at this time to trace this number, announce this number, connect to this number, or add this number to your lists." Such as from cellular, via certain carriers or switches (including some inTRA-LATA calls via BellSouth from certain BellSouth or independent telco communities), or via certain operator services. i.e., SS7-connectivity is not yet fully implemented. As for an 'auto-connect-back' after a quote on *69/1169, I am *always* giving the prompt message if there was a number/time/date quote. However, if the call originated from a PBX system (with outgoing trunk lines), a public/pay/coin telephone (both telco and COCOT), or if it was via a Long Distance carrier (whether inTER-LATA as well as placed via over-ride codes for inTRA-LATA), I still get the prompt after the quote, but I then get the message: "We're sorry, but Touch*Star (tm) cannot be used at this time to connect to this number." Of course, I can always manually dial the number myself, but if it were a PBX outgoing trunk number, I won't be able to reach the *party's* extension who had called me. *66/1166 (Repeat Dial) is used to alert me when a busy number has become available, as well as to redial/connect to my last outgoing call. However I can only use it on inTRA-LATA calls placed via my LEC, BellSouth. If I try to use it after dialing a number which was out of my LATA (i.e. via a long distance carrier) or after dialing an inTRA-LATA number but via a long distance carrier by using 10(1X)XXX+ codes or 800/888/950 numbers, I get the recording: "We're sorry, but Touch*Star (tm) service cannot be used at this time to trace this number, announce this number, connect to this number, or add this number to your lists." Again, I can manually dial that number, over and over, until it isn't busy anymore. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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, 2 Dec 96 21:57 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Question Concerning 'Interconnect Charges' Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > It's my understanding, and _please_ correct me if I'm wrong, that > when a call is initiated on, say, the NYNEX network and is terminated > on say, the BellSouth network NYNEX would have to pay BellSouth an > interconnect or termination charge for completing this call. Now I've > heard that this can be anywhere from 1.5 to 3 cents PER MINUTE. Is > this true?? It's about half true. When you call from, say, New York to Florida, your call is carred by NYNEX to your preferred long distance carrier (call it TPC) at a "point of presence" or POP near you, then TPC carries it to Florida, and gives it to BellSouth at a POP there, and then BellSouth carries it to the recipient. TPC pays a per minute charge to the local carrier at both, yes both, ends of the connection, so in this case TPC would pay both NYNEX and BellSouth. The rate is on order of 2 to 3 cents/minute for big telcos, but can be up in the 25 cent/min range for tiny rural telcos. > If it is, I ask what is there to prevent an ISP from purchasing > their own phone switch and hitting up a NYNEX, MFS, etc. for these > interconnect charges? Since ALL the traffic would be inbound the > ISP would be paid for terminating every call. You have it backwards. NYNEX would love to force ISPs to connect like long distance companies so they could connect these per-minute fees. The 1987 "modem tax" furor was about exactly this issue. Adding to the confusion, there's a whole different set of issues when there are multiple local phone companies interconnected. Depending on the deal they negotiate, the companies may "bill and keep", in which each company keeps whatever revenue they collect for calls between them, revenue sharing, or a per-minute charge nominally based on relative ownership of connecting facilities. This is a particular sore point with cellular carriers, since they usually have to pay several cents per minute to the landline telco for calls from cellular to landline, but landline rarely pays them anything for the smaller volume of calls going the other way. It might well make sense for an ISP to set up a captive local telco to interconnect with the existing landline company, particularly if it could co-locate some of its facilities in existing telephone offices. If the landline carriers were serious about their recent whining about Internet users overloading phone switches, they'd be overjoyed to help make this happen, and would encourage people to buy their modem-heavy second lines from the ISP's telco and keep those four-hour calls off the regular telco's switch. But they're not, so they don't.* Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Trumansburg NY Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies" and Information Superhighwayman wanna-be * - You'll currently see local Bell telcos showing considerable enthusiasm for helping other local telcos get set up, since that's a checklist item before the Bell companies can get into the long distance business, but that enthusiasm will evaporate approximately 1 millisecond after they get long distance authority. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 05:49:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Announcement: New Low-Noise Cryptography Mailing List Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 22:16:52 -0500 (EST) From: "Perry E. Metzger" Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT: New low-noise cryptography mailing list [Sorry that this is several weeks late, folks.] "Cryptography" is a low-noise mailing list devoted to cryptographic technology and its political impact. WHAT TOPICS ARE APPROPRIATE: "On topic" discussion includes technical aspects of cryptosystems, social repercussions of cryptosystems, and the politics of cryptography such as export controls or laws restricting cryptography. Discussions unrelated to cryptography are considered "off topic". If you subscribe, please try to keep your postings "on topic". In order to assure that the quality of postings to the mailing list remains high, repeated postings "off topic" may result in action being taken by the list moderators. MODERATION POLICY: In order to keep the signal to noise ratio high, the mailing list will be moderated during its initial weeks of operation. This will be changed if it appears that the list will remain on topic without moderation. TO SUBSCRIBE: send mail to majordomo@c2.net with the line subscribe cryptography in the body of your mail. If you wish to subscribe a mailing address other than the one you are sending from, send a message with the line subscribe cryptography [address] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Dec 1996 20:36:36 -0500 From: John D Cropper Subject: Announcing New Telecom Web Page No file this month, just a URL ... 75% of the NPA Excel spreadsheet, and both maps are now available online! http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ Up-to-the-minute information, and live links to other sources. The remainder of the spreadsheet should be converted in the next 60 days. John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 LINCS 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Dec 96 21:34 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (US & Canada) Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > In some countries use line monitoring devices (supposedly UK and > Germany), in some countries I can't dial (I can open the line but > dialing no-way) and in some countries I can't even open the line. I > have good experiences with Hong-Kong (I know this is not Europe). Most likely you're running into dial tone differences. The tone pairs for tone dialing are the same everywhere in the world, but dial tones differ. Set your modem to "blind dial" and you should be back in business. I've found that regardless of the official standard telephone plug, hotels throughout the world use the American RJ-11 phone plug, so you won't find phone adapters very useful. On the other hand, power plugs vary all over the lot, so power adapters are essential. I've dialed into ibm.net from many points in North America as well as from Brazil, Argentina, and Chile. Other than the dialtone problem, and occasionally timeouts because the lines back to the US are often slow and overloaded, it's been easy to set up. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof ------------------------------ From: bkron@netcom.com (W Halverson) Subject: Re: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (US & Canada) Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 07:55:13 GMT Daniel P. Ritsma writes: > In some countries use line monitoring devices (supposedly UK and > Germany), in some countries I can't dial (I can open the line but > dialing no-way) and in some countries I can't even open the line. I've had customers from overseas who couldn't get their modems to work here in the US. In most of those cases, their foreign modems wouldn't recognize a US dialtone and so would never dial, thinking there was no dialtone. Configuring to blind-dial fixes those problems just fine. Fortunately, DTMF tones are universal. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 17:46:26 -0500 From: Jim Jacobs Subject: Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts On 24 Nov 1996, Chris Jones wrote: >> In several communities, including Newton, Watertown, Somerville, >> Charlestown and Framingham, there would actually be two area >> codes. > It's interesting to note that, with the exception of Charlestown, > where I live, all the other communities are municipalities (i.e., > cities or towns). Charlestown is a neighborhood of Boston, having > been annexed in the late 19th century. It's about a mile square, with > about 15,000 residents and not an outsized business community (i.e., > not a lot of phones compared to other places) so it's hard to believe > that there is an overriding necessity to divide it in two. Can anyone > say why this division is being considered (and where)? I'm guessing > that maybe we're served by a couple of different central offices, and > the split would be made along that line. Most people living in Charlestown don't realize it, but the Charlestown exchanges (241, 242, etc.) are switched by Nynex at the downtown Boston central office located at 185 Franklin Street. These exchanges will be staying in the 617 area code. A very small number of Charlestown addresses, located in the northern part of the district, are served by Somerville exchanges. Somerville is moving to the new 781 area code. In another part of the Boston area, Newton residents who are served by the 469 exchange will retain the 617 area code while the rest of Newton becomes 781. The 469 exchange is served by the West Roxbury Central Office. West Roxbury is remaining in 617. I have a question to my friends in the Boston area. The 333 exchange covers the west side of the town of Milton but is switched in Hyde Park. Hyde Park will remain is 617 while Milton is going to 781. Unlike the 469 prefix which has customers in West Roxbury (617), Brookline (617), and Newton (781), the 333 prefix has only Milton residences and businesses on it. Which area code will 333 wind up in? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 09:01:21 -0500 From: Stanley Cline Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Subject: Re: Integretel Again Martin McCormick (martin@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu) wrote: > My wife later said that she saw the Integretel sticker on the > phone and thought that by using our AT&T calling card she would > bypass any unusual charges. Now she knows that all that happens > in such a case. I find it strange that this even happened with an *AT&T* calling card. If it had been a LOCAL TELCO calling card (issued by SWBell, etc.) then yes, they would have accepted the card. If you had an "old" AT&T card (that was area code + phone number + PIN) I can see that as well, as the AOS can see phone number and bill from *just that* (*without* checking the LIDB, PIN, etc.)! But ... AT&T has recently started issuing "TrueChoice" calling cards that are NOT of the area code + phone number + PIN format -- they are of the format PHONE NUMBER (NO area code) + (usually) two digits + PIN. Since there is no area code involved (and the two digits don't have anything to do with the customer's area code) these cards ONLY work via AT&T. (You can also request a "vanity" card number that has *nothing* to do with phone number at all.) Other carriers (MCI, Sprint, LCI) issue cards that are *also* area code + phone number + PIN, but I have NEVER seen any of these work with any carrier other than the one that issued the card. In general, IXC calling cards are "safer" than LECs' with regard to encountering overcharges. Stanley Cline * roamer1@pobox.com * http://www.mindspring.com/~scline/ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #642 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Dec 4 19:39:24 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id TAA21285; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 19:39:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 19:39:24 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612050039.TAA21285@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #644 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Dec 96 19:39:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 644 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Chat Room Now Open (TELECOM Digest Editor) USRobotics Kills Cordless Phone Product Line! (Walt Lillyman) First MCI Made Buses, Now AVIS is a Telco ... (Danny Burstein) GTE and ISP's (Steven Lichter) Re: _Wired_ Article on Undersea Cables (John R. Grout) Re: COCOT 800-Access Charges; Questions and Analysis (Nils Andersson) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 4 Dec 1996 18:52:39 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Telecom Chat Room Now Open I wish to announce the opening of the telecom online conference area. This is a part of the telecom web page which allows users to chat back and forth in real time via the web. It is not a new concept by any means, but it is new here. The URL is http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/chat If you prefer, or you are on the TELECOM Digest home page, then you will find a menu selection taking you to the chat function as well. Please read the help file which is part of the Chat Room. You should also bear in mind that it is an anonymous chat (although you can and are encouraged to register your name/email address when you begin each chat session), and as such, forgeries, spam and other forms of fraud are possible. In this chat, the previous comments remain available in the 'transcript' file until such time as it is flushed out. How often it gets flushed will really depend on what appears there. I would *like* to see this area used for realtime discussions between participants here, and if anyone wants to volunteer to take a certain time slot to conduct a moderated chat on a specific topic they are welcome to do so. It will be announced here a few days ahead, etc. So that there is no misunderstanding, although I don't really care what discussion takes place there, you should be aware that anyone can call the page at any time and see what you or your alias have written. Additionally, I have the benefit of the daily webstats report and a detailed log of who was on the page and at what times, etc. I am not going to monitor or censor it. It will get flushed as it fills up to a certain point each day. So ... have fun with it! http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives (main entrance) http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/chat (chat room) http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (archives) http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/TELECOM_Digest_Online PAT ------------------------------ From: Walt Lillyman Subject: USRobotics Kills Cordless Phone Product Line! Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 17:22:37 -0600 Organization: CODA, Inc. Reply-To: waltl@codamc.com Just got off the phone with USRobotics Sales. After re-evaluating the cordless phone market, USRobotics has cancelled plans to sell their upcoming line of "Performance" cordless telephone products, including the 100, 310 and 520 models. Paraphrasing: because of increasing competition and decreasing profit margins in this market, USRobotics believes it's in their best interest to avoid entering the cordless phone market. They have no plans to sell the product line to another vendor. No, I didn't get the guy's name, but you can confirm this info by calling USRobotics Sales at 1-800-DIAL-USR, (1-800-342-5877). Wait for a human, and ask to speak to somebody in Sales for telephone products. In memory, here are links to some pages which will probably disappear: Press Release, 1/6/96: http://www.usr.com/aboutusr/103_08.html Info on 520M from hitec.com: http://www.hitec.com/usr/520.html Bummer. The 520-series had everything _I_ was looking for. Walt Lillyman Programmer/Analyst, CODA, Inc. waltl@codamc.com http://www.codamc.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 20:47:50 EST From: danny burstein Subject: First MCI Made Busses, Now AVIS is a Telco ... The attached decision is courtesy of the NYS Public Service Commission and can be verified at its website: www.dps.state.ny.us (dps= dep't of public service) minor editing done to correct formatting STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION At a session of the Public Service Commission held in the City of Albany on October 23, 1996 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: John F. O'Mara, Chairman Eugene W. Zeltmann Harold A. Jerry, Jr. William D. Cotter Thomas J. Dunleavy Case 96-C-0758 - Petition of Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to resell all forms of telephone service in New York. ORDER ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY (Issued and Effective November 19, 1996) BY THE COMMISSION: Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. petitioned the Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to resell all forms of telephone services within New York State. Petitioner proposes to resell various telephone services, including but not limited to, local exchange access, private lines, tie lines and foreign exchange service to the public through use of facilities or capacity obtained from other carriers, and also seeks authorization to provide credit card telephone services and alternative operator services. Subscribers will thereby be afforded the opportunity to place calls to points within New York State and to interstate points via services offered in competition with those of landline telephone companies as well as other common carriers and other resellers. The Commission has long held that the public interest is enhanced by telecommunications competition. Because petitioner's entry into the telecommunications market will serve to further enhance competition, we are authorizing Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. to operate as a reseller of all forms of telephone service within New York State. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. is put on notice, however, that if it decides to offer local exchange access to residential or business customers it must abide by certain regulatory requirements, discussed below, that are designed to ensure sufficient consumer protections. In a May 22, 1996 Opinion and Order the Commission determined that all local service providers will be required to define their service territories, provide access to emergency services, and comply with the Commission's consumer protection rules. Thus, the Competition II order effectively reverses the presumption that certain rules (i.e., rules pertaining to consumer protections) applicable to more traditional telephone providers do not apply to resellers. Accordingly, in the event Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. decides to offer local exchange access to residential or business customers, it must abide by the requirements set forth in Case 94-C-0095, Opinion and Order referenced above. Petitioner has complied with the certification requirements set forth in our rules and notice of the application has been duly published and a hearing held as required by Section 99 of the Public Service Law. The Commission has determined that the public interest is served by authorizing Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. to operate as a reseller of all forms of telephone services via landline telephone company or other common carrier facilities in New York State. Accordingly, it is CERTIFIED, subject to the conditions set forth in this order and not otherwise, public convenience and necessity warrant Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. being authorized to operate as a reseller of all forms of telephone services within New York State. The Commission orders: 1. This order constitutes a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) authorizing Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. to operate as a reseller of all forms of telephone services via landline telephone company or other common carrier facilities within New York State, subject to applicable Commission rules and the terms, conditions, and requirements described in this order. 2. In granting Avis Rent A Car System, Inc.'s Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, the Commission relies upon the truthfulness of information and statements contained in petitioner's application for a CPCN. The Commission may revoke this authority if Avis Rent A Car System, Inc.'s application is found to have contained false and/or misleading information or statements. 3. Regarding the provision of intrastate operator assisted communications services, Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. shall be subject to Section 649.2 of 16 NYCRR. 4. Unless and until Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. complies with applicable Commission Rules (16 NYCRR 649.6), it shall not offer emergency operator services (i.e., emergency calls dialed as "911 or 0") to any reseller of telephone service via customer-owned currency operated telephone service or credit card activated telephones located in New York State. 5. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. shall advise all of its New York State telephone vendor clients that all calls dialed by their users as "911 or 0" with no additional digits following, must be routed into the local network (i.e., to the incumbent local exchange company) with no delay for "911" and allowing no more than five seconds of delay after the caller dials "0". 6. In the event an emergency call bypasses the above restrictions and is routed to Avis Rent A Car System, Inc., Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. shall have procedures in place to handle such calls expeditiously. 7. The Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity issued by this order shall be effective upon the effective dates provided in appropriately filed tariff schedules, said schedules to be filed within 90 days of the issue date of this order and said schedules not to become effective on less than 60 days notice. 8. The Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity granted by this order may be revoked by the Commission if Avis Rent A Car System, Inc., (i) cancels or otherwise fails to maintain tariffs on file with the Commission, or (ii) fails to file its tariff schedules with the Commission within 90 days of the issue date of this order. 9. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. shall submit to the Commission written documentation to demonstrate satisfactory compliance with the consumer protection issues discussed in this order in advance of or in connection with any tariff offering to provide local exchange access to residential or business customers. Any such tariff must be filed on not less than 90 days notice and such tariffs will not become effective unless and until applicable requirements are satisfactorily met. 10. This proceeding is continued. By the Commission, (Signed) John C. Crary Secretary http://www.dps.state.ny.us/OrdersTel/96C0758.OR-1.t ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 19:52:07 PST From: Steven Lichter Subject: GTE and ISP's Someone a while back had said they thought GTE was blocking trunking for other suppliers, later they said it appears not. Hear is a release that was sent to me on what GTE is doing to help make the services work better. GTE INTRODUCES NEW SERVICE TO HELP INTERNET AND ONLINE SERVICE PROVIDERS EXPAND DIAL-UP NETWORKS GTE today introduced its CyberPOP(SM) service to help Internet and Online Service Providers (ISPs and OSPs) cost effectively expand their high-speed, dial-up networks and grow their customer base. CyberPOP, a data aggregation service that provides central-office-based remote access for ISPs and OSPs, creates a "point of presence" for companies that operate in or near GTE's 28-state serving territory. GTE's CyberPOP service is available today in approximately 130 markets, and several companies already use the service. In addition to supplying a significant number of dial-up ports, GTE's CyberPOP service provides a combination of computer servers, routers and high-speed modems, as well as national equipment maintenance and network management capabilities. CyberPOP service supports multiple speeds of Internet access. Within each local calling area, companies using GTE's CyberPOP service can deliver Internet access to consumers at speeds up to 28.8 kbps, and also support the newer 56 kbps modems. To accommodate the demand for higher bandwidth, GTE can also provide Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN), which allows rapid, high- quality transmission of voice, video and data over a single telephone line at speeds 10 times faster than a conventional modem. "By establishing dial-up ports within the central office environment, GTE can effectively manage a much higher grade of service for ISPs and OSPs," said Chris Brickler, GTE Internet access services product manager. In addition to providing the central office-based service, he said that "the experience GTE has already gained this year has positioned us as the industry leader in providing local network solutions to this market segment. We look forward to expanding our customer base and portfolio of cyber services." CyberPOP supports multiple standard Internet protocols and several modem types including V.34, V.32 and V.32bis, and will also incorporate the emerging 56 kbps analog modems. GTE's service currently offers equipment from multiple platforms including Cisco Systems, Bay Networks, Ascend and US Robotics. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II and Macintosh computers. ------------------------------ From: grout@sp55.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: _Wired_ Article on Undersea Cables Date: 03 Dec 1996 14:42:23 -0600 Organization: Center for Supercomputing R and D, UIUC In article gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) writes: > The cover story in the December, 1996, issue of _Wired_ magazine is on > undersea cables, entitled "Mother Earth, Motherboard" by Neal > Stephenson. Specifically, it is about the FLAG (Fiber Link Around > Globe) cable venture, which runs from the United Kingdom to China, > Japan and Korea. The route is all undersea except for major land > crossings at Egypt and Thailand. The title refers to the concept that > the earth is now a large computer and cables like FLAG are but traces > on its circuit board. I'd like to mention two other articles on FLAG. The second article (which I've read) is a general overview, while the first article (which I found a reference and abstract for) appears much more technical. 1. "The FLAG cable system (Fiberoptic Link Around the Globe)" by Thomas Welsh, Roger Smith, and Haruo Azami, IEEE Communications (magazine), February 1996, pp. 30-35. Abstract: Part of a special section on undersea communication networks. The Fiberoptic Link Around the Globe (FLAG) Cable System to link 12 countries is described. When completed in September 1997, FLAG will use 27,000 km of cable from the U.K. to Japan. FLAG will allocate network capacity to telecommunications carriers on the basis of need and will use erbium-doped fiber amplifiers to boost optical signals. The system will be able to traverse the land crossings in Egypt and Thailand without repeaters. FLAG has fully redundant terminal transmission equipment, a digital cross connect system, and local Stratum 2 clock sources. Network management is conducted through a centralized, integrated, remote facility, where the network elements of FLAG can be monitored and controlled. Traffic is expected to be maintained on the network 99.999 percent of the time, and only 1.45 ship repairs are anticipated for the network over 25 years. In-network and out-of-network restorations are described. 2. "The Glass Necklace (FLAG, the fiber-optic link around the globe)" by Frank J. Denniston and Peter K. Runge, IEEE Spectrum, October 1995, pp. 24-27. Abstract: Part of a special report on engineering "megaprojects". The fiber-optic link around the globe (FLAG) is the most ambitious undersea lightwave communications system ever constructed. When it is finished in 1997, FLAG will link Great Britain and Japan by a complex undersea optical-fiber cable that will span 27,300 km in 8 sections. At the heart of FLAG is third-generation transoceanic optical-fiber cable technology that will permit data transmission at 5.3 Gb/s on each of 2 pairs of optical fibers. So far, 46 international common carriers from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and North America have agreed to purchase capacity on the system. The US$1.5 billion project is funded by FLAG Ltd. and will be constructed by AT&T Submarine Systems and KDD Submarine Cable Systems, both of which are suitably experienced and leading suppliers of undersea communications systems, including the new optical amplifier that will ensure FLAG's signal quality. John R. Grout Center for Supercomputing R & D j-grout@uiuc.edu Coordinated Science Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: COCOT 800-Access Charges; Questions and Analysis Date: 3 Dec 1996 20:13:54 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.14) In article , zstewart@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Zhahai Stewart) writes: >> If one believes in government regulation as a panacea >> for everything, then the answer is more regulation. > Since I know nobody who self identifies with believing that government > regulation is a panacea for everything, this is a null statement, a > rhetorical ploy. A fair statement without wife-beating-terminated-yet? > presuppositions would be: > "If one believes that government regulation is sometimes useful, then > one can discuss whether or not this is one of those situations". Since I am the quoted party (after the double arrows on top), I will have to plead guilty as charged. You are of course correct in that a lot of the discussion is colored (consciously or unconsiously) by each writer's philosphical outlook. Mine is that government regulation should only exist when there is a _very_strong_ case that some general public good is served, not merely that one side or the other has more political clout. Sometimes the side with clout is consumers, as in this case where the charges are obvious. In most cases producers have more clout, and we pay a lot more for various regulated products - mostly agricultural - because of government regulation, but this is more visible to the producers (PAC contributors) than to consumers. Remember that most of us are typically both consumers and producers, the assymetry being that we each produce a much narrower range of items than we consume, this is known as specialization. Thus, many of us want producer-friendly regulation of our own industry (however defined) and consumer-friendly regulation of everybody else's. This does not constitute a strong reason for the desirabilty of either to society as a whole. In the case of 911, the issue is not actually revenue versus non-revenue, but that it should be always possible to make the call, regardless of whether the caller happens to carry the right coins. (I personally would have no problem with reimbursing the payphone operator out of tax money but I realize that this is political hot potato, and at any rate 911 calls are RARE BUT CRITICAL). In this case only, there is a clear net gain to society as a whole. In the case of free 800, there is no such clear case of a public good being served, at least not clear to me. One of the many arguments for _not_ regulating 800 is that it will create a greater incentive for more payphones. Various writers inform me that there are hardly ever cases where there could plausibly be a pay phone and there is none. I disagree wholeheartedly. In any case, yes I strongly believe that the burden of proof should be on the regulators, not on the proponents of economic freedom. If this be a crime, I am guilty. Some specific points: > The "opportunity costs" argument would, I think, need some examination. > Do we count local and non-800 number access which is lost (say, somebody > needing to make a paid call who goes to another phone, because a given > COCOT payphone is occupied with an 800 caller)? Or do we count the lost > opportunity to make extra profits by steering a call to a more expensive > LD carrier? I suggest only the former is relevant here. There is another way of looking at it. You are somehow missing the point that by forcing a provider to let some customers have the service at the provider's marginal cost (in this case essentially zero), the fixed costs have to be distributed against the rest of the customer base. > Q: Is something broken which needs fixing? Is there currently a real > problem (too few payphones, COCOTs going out of business, unfair subsidies, > dysfunctional competitive market producing bad results)? If so, then we > have a clear need to be looking for solutions, including possibly raising > charges for 800 access. If not, then there is less pressure to change > things, and arguments for change should revolve around how things could > be made even better than the currently working system. The whole argument rests on that what happens to be the status quo is a given, and that the burden of proof rests on whoever wishes to change anything. This is a poor argument in general, and particularly in a rapidly changing environment such as telco. And, yes i believe we have a set of unfair subsidies, where the people who are less telco adept get stuck with the charges. As the level of telco adeptness required to avoid these charges is constantly lowered, the payphone operator has economic incentive -even need, if he is to stay in the business - to hammer the non-adepts (often poor people by the way) harder and harder, or to quit. >> airlines should be FORCED to sell standby seats for a fistful of >> dollars, as their marginal cost for filling an empty seat given that >> they are flying the plane anyway is very low. > The big cost there is that people would wait for the cheap seats rather > than pay full fare. This is a bad analogy thereby. Actually, this is precisely what is happening. When you can by a prepaid (using 800) phone card for 10 bucks, more and more people are using them, and the number of full-revenue calls (to the payphone) is dropping, with results as described above. >>> It usta be free, therefore it should always be free: >> This is the entitlement argument in a nutshell. > This trivializes the actual arguments presented (as well as imputing > illiteracy to those who would advance said arguments). One form of it > was: All existing COCOTs got into the business under the present terms of > free 800-access. The proposed charges for 800 access represent a new > sweetening of the deal, a unilateral shift in favor of the COCOTs, with > no balancing. Some could see this not unlike people buying houses near > an airport (private or public) then demanding that the noise be decreased. > If one is going to throw around "entitlement" so loosely, we can also ask > why the COCOTs are now inherently "entitled" to get money for 800 numbers > but not for 911 numbers? Better still, let's avoid that overly politically > charged "e" buzzword and stick to the facts. 1) Sorry about the imputation of illiteracy. Really. 2) This argument has some validity and generality, in that when regulation is suddenly imposed, withdrawn or changed, there are sudden winners and losers. This is a real problem, and offends many people's sense of equity. The solution, in this and most cases, is to have some kind of gradualism to reduce the impact. For example, one could start with a low max on existing payphones (to be increased or removed over say 10 years) and no or a high limit on new payphones. 3) 911 is special because the benefits to society are very large, and the cost of letting them through is truly minimal, by any accounting, as they are rare. 4) I have no intention of avoiding the entitlement buzzword when I think it is appropriate. > this a bogus argument? Will the real result be that COCOTs will > charge as much as ever on local calls, AND then make even more profits > on 800 access charges in addition? Hardly a "solution". Here the poster's own philosophical inclinations show through. The suitability of a "solution" obviously depend on one's definition of what constitutes the "problem", if anything. If you define the "problem" as being overcharged by payphone operators, your argument MAY hold together (on the other hand competition in payphones may work the opposite way as I suggest; in reality it will probably vary with location). If you define the "problem" in some neutral way (as you seem to claim), then the "problem" would be something like "how should payphones be regulated or not to maximize the benefit of everybody, producers and consumers". In my view, that is even to interventionist, and I would perfer "Is there an overriding public benefit that makes a strong case for regulating payphones, and if so, what form should it take?". This stronger test is, at least in my view, prefereable, for many reasons, the most obviouls being that the government's track record in regulating in the public interest is spotty at best. (Peanuts, Sugar, Apricots, Cheese all cost about twice what they would in an unregulated market, here the "public" interest [read: Political clout] is mysteriously aligned with the producers, not the consumers.) >> It is typical and obvious that if an entity is legally prohibited from >> raising revenue one way, it will in effect overcharge for something >> else! This is logically inevitable!!! > No, it's not. Does prohibiting telcos from charging more for loud > conversations than for quiet ones mean they inevitably have to > "overcharge" for voice-level-independent service? I suppose it can, > IF YOU GET TO CONTROL THE DEFINITION OF "OVERCHARGE" ANY WAY YOU > PLEASE. But there are a great number of logically defensible ways > to define the "proper charge" and cost distribution, and thus > implicitly define "overcharge". Actually, you are right, "overcharging" lies in the eye of the beholder. This is in fact precisely my point. Remember that the whole theory of payphone operators being "ripoff artists" depend on some definition of "overcharge" however, including your discussion about LD kickbacks. In my case, on reflection, the definition I had in mind was rather circular; what I meant to say was that if a vendor has to subsidize one service, he will charge more than he otherwise would for some other services, which then seen in isolation will seem unusually profitable. > (long argument about how the history and order and in which happens is > important) Typically, you have a point, what the public will accept (as consumers or as voters) does indeed depend on timing and history. (Many countries -- with governent owned phone systems and pay phones -- charge for "toll free" as for a local call by the way, with the typical exception that the call is untimed, even if local calls are not). This goes back to why it makes sense to make any regulatory change in any direction cut in over time, rather than being suddenly imposed, as I noted above. > Seems like a "compromise" rather biased towards the COCOTs. On the > one hand, we'd give COCOTs absolute and total control over pricing > (except 911, hardly a volume leader), which is basically the whole > shebang, the big apple, the max possible gain for their side. And in > return for this maximal concession, what similarly valuable thing do > they give up? They will finally honestly post the charges (costing > them effectively zilch percent of overhead)? Sorry, this sounds like > almost-unconditional surrender, except we'll let the opposing soldiers > keep their uniforms. (Note that I don't question your right to > advocate such surrender, I just question calling it a "compromise"). Your choice of "we" and "they" shows very clearly that you are not nearly as "neutral" as you claim. (By the way, I own no stock in any telco, or in anything else!) Actually, requiring disclosure may make a very considerable dent in some of the high-cost-LD-with-kickbacks-to-phoneowner-and-location-owner operations of which we both disapprove. (Disclosure, within reason, is by the way a social good, this is easy to conclude by running some examples of disclosure and non-disclosure). > Not to "compensate" them for being honest, but because it would be > less neccessary. But until the market becomes more competitive, well > ... buying pigs in pokes is not my forte. Philosophy again. You derive "necessity" out of a source that is not available to me. > everything" nor "deregulate everything" - rather, "regulate only when > competition isn't working, but prefer competition when it does work" > -- based on some real world feedbacks rather than ivory tower theories > (like "logical inevitabilities"). Unfortunately, the definition of "working" or "not working" for competition, regulation and most things lies to a large extent in the eye of the beholder. The local 7-11 charges more than the grocery store for the same items, but they are close by and open 24 hours. Does this mean that competition does not work? Clearly, they have a "local monopoly" as well as a "temporal monopoly". Somebody could make that argument plausible, but I would not buy it, would you? Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #644 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Dec 4 22:38:44 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA07630; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 22:38:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 22:38:44 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612050338.WAA07630@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #645 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Dec 96 22:38:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 645 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 800 Service and Cellphones (Lloyd Matthews) GSM Status in San Jose? (Lloyd Matthews) Re: Fiber-Optic/Problem w 28.8kb Modems? (Alan Sanderson) Re: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (Nils Andersoon) Modems in Countries Other Than North America (Earle Robinson) Phone Firms To List E-Mails (Mike Pollock) Re: MCI's Blast Through Bell's Arguments (Kelly Daniels) Re: Interconnection Arbitrations (Kelly Daniels) Re: Question Concerning 'Interconnect Charges' (Michael A. Desmon) Re: COCOT 800-Access Charges (Dave J. Stott) ScamBusters Spammer (Dave Keeney) Telecom Digest Search Page Now Available (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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Lloyd Matthews Subject: 800 Service and Cellphones Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 15:56:52 +0000 Organization: TRW-SIG Sunnyvale Reply-To: lloydm@pop.svl.trw.com I recently managed to get an AT&T True Ties number linked to my Sprint Spectrum 703-area PCS phone, but it was a ridiculous hassle. AT&T wanted a "physical address" for my cellphone, which is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. I tried to give them my residence/billing address in CA, but that didn't work because the area code was different. I finally gave them my client's VA address, which satisfied them, and yea verily the 800 number was activated. Now that I've finished the project for that particular client, that address is even more meaningless. Do all 800-providers require a dummy "address" for cellphones? They should get a clue and realize that cellphones are, duh, MOBILE. Lloyd (Lloyd_Matthews@trw.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your 'physical address' for any kind of phone service would be the address at which you normall do business and receive mail, phone calls, etc. The fact that the area code was different between the two phones should have made no difference at all. If the person insisted that the area codes had to match, I wonder how they would deal with people around Chicago where 773/312/847/708 are all quite interchangable on cell phones, pagers, etc. It is true however that many carriers resist assigning an 800 number to a cellular phone or a pager (that is, a direct number as opposed to one that goes through some central service where thousands of pagers/cell phones are manipulated, etc.) The reason the carriers often times question putting an 800 number on a cellular phone is because of the 'double billing' factor which many customers do not understand and would later challenge; i.e, you pay whatever the charge is per minute on incoming 800 calls and you then pay whatever the rate is per minute for the very same call going out over the air to your cellular phone. Often times the 800 side gets charged even if the cell phone does not answer, etc. Calls routed through 800 ==> cell phone as a result are quite expensive. There certainly is no technical reason it cannot be done. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lloyd Matthews Subject: GSM Status in San Jose? Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 16:00:47 +0000 Organization: TRW-SIG Sunnyvale Reply-To: lloydm@pop.svl.trw.com My GSM phone in San Jose is now giving me weak signal strength readings and a "No Access" message instead of the "No Network" message I had been getting. Is PacBell beginning to activate its PCS network in SF/SJ? Thanks! Lloyd (Lloyd_Matthews@trw.com) ------------------------------ From: Alan Sanderson 408 447-3859 Subject: Re: Fiber-Optic/Problem w 28.8kb Modems? Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 16:55:52 -0800 Organization: HP Americas Integration Center Reply-To: Alan_Sanderson@hp.com Joel Raskin wrote: > About two years ago, I noticed a degredation in the "sound" of my dial > tones on all three lines and I called the phone company to inquire. > THey told me they had converted the lines to fiber optic (I think the > lines from the main trunk into the building -- or from the CO to the > building) and the change in sound was the result. At that time, I did > not have 28.8k modems so I can't say whether or not I had better > connections prior to that. Chances are that in the process of going to fiber optics, they put in transcoders to double up the number of lines on a T1. That way your phone line is allowed only half a time slot, or 32kbits/sec. ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (US & Canada) Date: 4 Dec 1996 19:18:27 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.14) In article , bkron@netcom.com (W Halverson) writes: > Fortunately, DTMF tones are universal. At least they did something right. Just about everything else varies, for example: 1) Dial tones. Ever heard a british "humming" dial tone 2) Ring tones. The ring every six seconds is the international standard, but with many variations. The British "burr-burr" every 3.3 seconds or so is the most bizarre example. (Singapore and maybe other ex-British colonies [NOT US or Canada] use the the same burr-burr). 3) Busy tones. Fairly standard, I think. Comments anybody? 4) Rotary dial. Sweden uses 1 pulse for 0, 2 for 1, etc and 10 for 9. (Great for dialling companies that end in a bunch of zeros). Parts of Norway used to have reverse coding, 1 for 0, 2 for 9, 3 for 8 etc. I do not know if they still do. Truly bizarre! 5) Number unavailable/lines busy/etc/. I have been unable to find ANY standard, all sorts of tones and voice messages in various languages, somtimes unrelated to the calling and callee countries. Most peculiar: British, sounds like everybody else's dial tone. Comments? 6) Of course, modems below 2400 bps are different in North America and Europe. Fortunately these speed are now rare. Any more goodies, anyone? Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ Date: 04 Dec 96 10:59:31 EST From: Earle Robinson <76004.1762@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Modems in Countries Other Than North America (USA & Canada) I've lived for many years in Europe, have used dozens of different modems from the USA, starting with 300 bps and now v.34+, including US Robotics, AT&T, Supra, PPI, Hayes, Microcom, etc. Other than than the UK and Italy, where blind dialing is often required if the modem won't recognize the dial tone there, I have never had any problem connecting. As for line monitoring devices, the writer probably is referring to systems used to measure usage for the phone in switzerland in particular. Most such systems have been abandonned today, and those in germany only affected 2400 bps modems, not v.32 or higher modulations. In the rare instances where you can't connect it is usually due to an old pbx at the hotel. As in the usa, the only solution then is to move to another hotel. Each country usually has its own phone plug type, though many are now using the rj11 plug. So, it is wise to have a local plug in ones kit. Not a few hotels are hard-wired, too, requiring surgery to make a connexion. Power plugs in europe are relatively simple. All outside the UK will accept the same two round plugs. But, since ground is handled differently, some plugs have a female socket for the ground and others a male socket, it is wise to have a flat looking plug, widely sold in the states (accepts the two flat USA plug and the two round plugs to plug-in to the current) to avoid the grounds problem. Note that 99% of modems don't use a ground anyway. In any case, even if the modem cord has a ground, since europe uses monophase 220/230v you can dispense with ground unless you are using microwave or other appliance that draws a lot of current. Frankly, I've had more problems connecting in American hotels than when in Europe. Most European phone lines are better than in the USA nowadays, too, the one advantage of having a single phone company in each country. The exception is in the former Soviet-block countries where the phone lines are often quite awful. er ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 12:18:29 -0800 From: Mike Pollock Organization: SJS Entertainment Subject: Phone Firms To List E-Mails By ELIZABETH WEISE AP Cyberspace Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Having trouble finding an e-mail address? In the coming months, it may become as simple as opening the phone book in some parts of the United States and Canada. In response to customers' requests, phone companies in California, New York and the Canadian provinces Ontario and Quebec plan to give customers the option of listing e-mail and Web page addresses with their phone numbers. "We've been getting calls into our business office from people who want to be able to be reached electronically," said John Britton, spokesman for Pacific Telesis, the parent company of Pacific Bell. A fee for the service, likely to be available by spring, hasn't been set yet. But Britton said it would probably be similar to the charge for listing a second phone number. That costs residential customers 85 cents a month and a one-time fee of $5 for each line. About 1.2 million Californians are online. "The number one reason people tell us they go online is that they want to have e-mail -- which means a good chunk of those 1.2 million people have e-mail addresses," Britton said. Nynex, a regional phone company serving the Northeast, will begin rolling out the service in February in Westchester County, north of New York City. Nynex spokesman Phil Santoro said businesses will first list their information, followed by residential customers. "The main demand has been from businesses, which is why we've started there. But it's definitely the direction in which customers are going," he said from the Middleton, Mass., headquarters of the Nynex Yellow Pages division. There will be a nominal fee for the listing, he said. "People who want to get their e-mail or (Web address) in the next phone book should contact us now," he said. Bell Canada, which serves customers in Ontario and Quebec, is already taking orders for the additional listings, though new phone books won't be printed until February. ------------------------------ From: telco@teleport.com (Kelly Daniels) Subject: Re: MCI's Blast Through Bell's Arguments Date: 4 Dec 1996 03:27:20 GMT Organization: Telco Planning The BOC network may very well be congested with Internet Traffic, but many new LECs in metro areas do have their dial networks inplace and are dialable. call them, if you do not have to port a number (interim portability or call forwarding perpetuates the BOC claim) then you can use the new NXX of the new LEC and use their vacant backbone. Beat the congestion! Kelly ------------------------------ From: telco@teleport.com (Kelly Daniels) Subject: Re: Interconnection Arbitrations Date: 4 Dec 1996 03:22:30 GMT Organization: Telco Planning For what it is worth, I have worked with for CLECs in this area, none have requested inter-connection from these 3 mill ILECs. The one closest to you that will be tested pretty well is PTI in Washington. I cannot remember if you are it's sister or you (ATU) is Anchorage. Regarding Alaska's strategies, there is ome fear that since IXC competition was hard in Alaska, and GCI was somewhat of a mystery arrangement, I believe you all to be fairly safe to file for a waiver or able to work with the commission to stay any competition. I have not seen any mention of this in two popular and thorough publications (BPR and Phillips). Kelly ------------------------------ From: mdesmon@gate.net (Michael A. Desmon) Subject: Re: Question Concerning 'Interconnect Charges' Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 18:34:49 -0400 Organization: IDS Long Distance >> If it is, I ask what is there to prevent an ISP from purchasing >> their own phone switch and hitting up a NYNEX, MFS, etc. for these >> interconnect charges? Since ALL the traffic would be inbound the >> ISP would be paid for terminating every call. > You have it backwards. NYNEX would love to force ISPs to connect like > long distance companies so they could connect these per-minute fees. > The 1987 "modem tax" furor was about exactly this issue. > It might well make sense for an ISP to set up a captive local telco to > interconnect with the existing landline company, particularly if it > could co-locate some of its facilities in existing telephone offices. > If the landline carriers were serious about their recent whining about > Internet users overloading phone switches, they'd be overjoyed to help > make this happen, and would encourage people to buy their modem-heavy > second lines from the ISP's telco and keep those four-hour calls off > the regular telco's switch. But they're not, so they don't.* A company I used to work for that is a regional long distance company as well as an internet service provider is doing exactly that. They have set up a local service division for their incoming modem lines and have an interconnection agreement with Ameritech, where they are paid an interconnection fee by Ameritech for calls terminating on those lines. They also provide internet access to small isps and provide modem lines in their POPs. I'm sure those interconnect fees (around 1.5 cents per minute) will add up. ------------------------------ From: dstott@juno.com (Dave J Stott) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 17:42:58 EST Subject: Re: COCOT 800-Access Charges In Telecom Digest #641, Zhahai Stewart wrote an interesting and thought provoking analysis of the COCOT 1-800 thread: > Sigh. It's hard to get a balanced description of the COCOT 800 number > charges pros and cons. One recent summary which ostensibly made some > attempt was unfortunately framed with a strong agenda: charges are OK. > For example: > competition isn't working, but prefer competition when it does work" > -- based on some real world feedbacks rather than ivory tower theories > (like "logical inevitabilities"). Here's some real-world feedback to think about. My daughter goes to swim practice after school and practice moves from pool to pool. She has a choice of one pay-phone vendor at each location, but there **may** be another payphone in a location that she can walk to. To call home **may** cost $.25 from a U S WEST phone, $.25 for 3 minutes from a COCOT. Sometimes she forgets her change, and has to make the call another way. If she has no change she can call 1-800-COLLECT and get through for free, (to her, though there's a $1.80 on the next phone bill). She can also call collect through the COCOT's AOS for up to $3.00 (she's done that before, too). Or, she can call my personal 800 number for free (to her) with no outrageous fee on my monthly bill. If COCOTs can charge $.35 per call to an 800 number, she can't call home at all if she forgets her quarter. That's real world. We're not poor, we're not COCOT dependent, we're not interested in market-based pricing vs government regulation. All we care about is that my teenager can call home from where ever she is, even if she forgets her quarter. .stott ------------------------------ From: Dave Keeny Subject: ScamBusters Spammer Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 12:45:18 +0500 Organization: Telecommunications Techniques Corporation Another "outing" of a particularly unethical e-mail spammer ... I'm on the Internet ScamBuster's mailing list and received an advertisement for discount computer hardware that appeared to be from the ScamBuster's mailing list server. It had the proper return addresses, etc., and looked valid on the surface. It was actually from an individual who figured out a way to spam everyone on the mailing list. This person is: ALAN FISHKIN CONSULTING 20111 SW 114 Ave Miami, FL 33189-1059 USA Fishkin, Alan (AF223) AFISHKIN@MSN.COM Voice: 305-251-6486 FAX: 305-238-0323 [One advertisement posted to Usenet said to leave voicemail if you call on Sunday] The message itself was sent from BellSouth's network via a Miami dialup. The people at Internet ScamBusters know what happened and are looking at the legalities involved. Clearly fraud was intended, but I have no idea if laws cover this particular type of fraud. Dave [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm sure there may be some people interested in Mr. Fishkin's products and services. Fortunatly I have not had too much trouble with people spamming the entire telecom list. There are techniques to keep the mailing list very well hidden and out of sight. I hope the maintainer of the list you mentioned learns from this experience. PAT] ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Telecom Digest Search Page Now Available Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 22:15:00 EST This is just a reminder that in response to requests for same, the TELECOM Digest and Archives web page now has a section devoted to searching through past articles in the comp.dcom.telecom. newsgroup. You can search by article name, author name, or some string which appeared in the subject or in the article itself. In addition you can do an author profile; that is, you can enter someone's name and find out what articles they have written in the past. Two search engines are used: Deja News and Reference.com. Our search page is set up with a template already prepared so that you do not need to bother with a lot of details or complications in your search effort. All you need to do is type in whatever you are looking for. To reach this feature in the Telecom Archives web page: URL: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/search.html (direct) URL: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives (home page menu) And also please note that starting today, an interactive, online conference area, or 'chat room' is available for telecom readers. You reach this via the URL: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/chat.html (or) http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/chat (same place) Feel free to use these new features of the Telecom Archives. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #645 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Dec 5 02:45:05 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA25859; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 02:45:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 02:45:05 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612050745.CAA25859@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #646 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Dec 96 02:44:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 646 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CNID/ANI (?) Tracks the Fugitive (Danny Burstein) Re: Fiber-Optic/Problem w 28.8kb Modems? (Ed Ellers) 310/562 Split: It's Quiet in LA, Too (was: 937 Area Code) (Robt. McMillin) Re: Area Code Splits - Why? (Robert McMillin) Re: Area Code Woes (Lisa Hancock) Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization (Greg Hennessy) More Spam Email With 800 Number (Greg Boop) I-Phone Scam Spam (Peter Judge) Connecting Non-PBX Line Powered Equipment to Analog PBX Line (S. Bradley) Local Numbers Into a PRI (Steve Wormley) Need Advice on Voicemail/Call Transfer Service (Barry Megdal) Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was 500 Numbers) (Nils Andersson) Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was 500 Numbers) (John J. Butz) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 05 Dec 1996 00:12:21 EST From: danny burstein Subject: CNID/ANI (?) Tracks the Fugitive In the past three weeks we had the tragic case of a disgraced NJ prosecuter, facing sentencing for some pretty nasty things, jump bail, run to Nevada, get found by the US Marshals, and shoot himself to death rather than surrender. The telecom angle comes about since, according to press reports, investigators tracked him to Nevada when he used a cellular phone. It's unclear from the leaked details whether they simply used CNID on folk and businesses (some, apparently, with 1-800 numbers) he called (either with their assistance or by going through central office internal records), and got the numbers of outgoing Nevada trunk lines, or whether they had further help from the local (Nev) cellular company and were able to narrow down his location by cell-site triangulation (and other tricks). In any event, they knew the town where he was staying and looked through the parking lots for his car. Here's part of an Associated Press story: Slip-Up With Phone Call Leads Feds to Bissell By DAVID WILKISON The Associated Press 11/27/96 9:21 PM Eastern NEWARK, N.J. (AP) -- Nicholas Bissell Jr. was a tough prosecutor who presumably knew the ins and outs of law enforcement, but it was a simple slipup that helped police find the fugitive in Nevada. Three U.S. marshals from Newark tracked Bissell to the casino town of Laughlin by tracing cellular telephone calls he made to hotels, apparently to make reservations, said Las Vegas Metro Police Detective Tom Ball. Rotolo would not elaborate on the calls, but sources also told newspapers Bissell began making a series of calls to people in New Jersey on Monday from Laughlin, where he had been staying at the Colorado Belle Hotel and Casino. Rotolo said marshals headed to Nevada late Monday. His car was found in the casino parking lot Tuesday morning. "That was the kiss of death, as soon as he made phone contact," a law enforcement source told The Star-Ledger of Newark in Wednesday's editions. Rather than surrender to authorities, the man who was to be sentenced Nov. 20 on 30 felony counts chose death over prison and shot himself in the head Tuesday in the $16-a-night room where he had registered under his own name. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Fiber-Optic/Problem w 28.8kb Modems? Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 00:00:03 -0500 Organization: Mikrotec Internet Services, Inc. (MISNet) Joel Raskin wrote: > About two years ago, I noticed a degredation in the "sound" of my dial > tones on all three lines and I called the phone company to inquire. > THey told me they had converted the lines to fiber optic (I think the > lines from the main trunk into the building -- or from the CO to the > building) and the change in sound was the result. At that time, I did > not have 28.8k modems so I can't say whether or not I had better > connections prior to that. > Does this diagnosis of the problem sound plausible? I had always > thought that fiber-optic was an improvement over copper and would > provide a better connection? I'm surprised to hear this being used to > explain why something won't work correctly. I'd suspect that the codecs on your end of the fiber aren't as good as the ones that were being used for your interoffice calls (at least) at the central office back when you had a normal pair to the CO. In my case I have gotten a 28,800 bps connection to my local ISP exactly once in a year and a half; I connect to the ISP and CompuServe (in the same CO) at 26,400 bps over 90% of the time. I have been able to consistently get 28,800 on an 800 number that Microsoft uses to refer Internet Explorer users to ISPs (fat lot of good that does me); I'm on an analog (1A ESS) switch, so the codec is on the other side of the switch and the one used for 800 (or maybe all LD) calls may well be different from the one used for local interoffice calls. We're getting a digital switch next Saturday (as I mentioned in this group earlier), so I'll post any news on changes. ------------------------------ From: rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin) Subject: 310/562 Split: It's Quiet in LA, Too (was: 937 Area Code ...) Reply-To: rlm@helen.surfcty.com Organization: Charlie Don't CERF Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 20:28:28 GMT On 26 Nov 1996 20:38:29 PDT, David O. Laney said: > Ameritech here locally has sure kept the area code split between > Cincinnati and Dayton pretty quiet. IMHO, we have a similar problem here. I got my new Pacific Bell white pages, only to find the area code split information hiding on the last page. The GTE white pages, which mysteriously appear on my doorstep each year, had this right up front. BTW, permissive dialing starts January 25, 1996; the area changing to 562 will be everything east of the Los Angeles River, i.e. Downey, Norwalk, Long Beach, and parts of San Pedro. Compton, the South Bay (including LAX), Santa Monica, and the Westside all stay 310. Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 12:47:43 -0800 From: rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin) Subject: Re: Area Code Splits - Why? Reply-To: rlm@helen.surfcty.com On 28 Nov 1996 10:51:01 PDT, lclee@primenet.com (Larry Lee) said: > If the phone company would extend DID into standard analog voice > lines, then we could go to Radio Shack and buy an extremely stupid > telehone switch ($100-$200 range) which would accept an additional > digit and route the call to 1 of 9 extensions (leaving extension 0 as > a default). This would allow homes/small businesses to have 10 > separate phone numbers with little to no phone company participation > in digits. I'm sure that popular conventions would arise such as 9 is > a fax, 8 is the answering machine, etc. [...] > What's wrong with this scheme? Why are things being done this way? Do you mean to force people to buy $100-200 worth of hardware if they want additional phone lines? How would the lines be delivered? Doesn't analog DID require a trunk bundle to be hauled to the customer? Who and in what manner is this to be paid for? Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Area Code Woes Date: 3 Dec 1996 03:38:30 GMT Organization: Philadelphia City Paper's City Net > same category. I've no idea what sort of emotional attachment some > people develop to area codes, but when they added zip codes to the > city I used to live in (Rancho Cucamonga, CA), no one said a peep about > it. People are very sensitive about the zip code they live in many places, and the post office is hit with many requests to split off zip codes if one community is combined with an undesirable one. In the Philadelphia area alone, residents of suburban Plymouth Township are upset their mailing address/zip code is Norristown (a small industrial city that, well, isn't what it used to be.) Residents of suburban Elkins Park got their own zip code -- they used to be lumped with an adjacent Philadelphia neighborhood which they didn't want. Where I live, Yardley PA (19067), there really isn't a post office for it anymore. Officially, we're "Morrisville" now (same zip code, where our P.O. is located.) But NO ONE in the Yardley section uses "Morrisville". I can go on and on. Let's just say that one's address, including area code and phone number, are an important status symbol to a lot of people. ------------------------------ From: gsh@clark.net (Greg Hennessy) Subject: Re: Help Needed on Telco Clock Synchronization Date: 4 Dec 1996 16:14:15 GMT Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc., Ellicott City, MD USA Kenneth A. Becker wrote: > Let's start off. In the US, somewhere near Boulder, CO, are banks of > cesium clocks run by the National Bureau of Standards. Said clocks are > one of the world's master timing references; that is, when you hear about > "leap seconds" and such, the timing for the whole business is run by > Boulder and other national timing centers. By US law, time in the United States is determined by the US Naval Observatory, not NIST (nee NBS). ------------------------------ Date: 04 Dec 1996 20:05 EST From: greg boop Subject: More Spam Email With 800 Number Hello Pat, I regularly read with interest (and enjoyed -- including your commentary) the telecom newsgroup. However it is becoming more difficult to devote proper time to this type of activity because of the ever increasing spam email I must sort through everyday. Today yet another spam email (one of many) arrived. This one had an 800 number that people could call for a get rich quick scheme. What further measures can the people on the net take to stop this type of unwanted activity. It appears that polite replies to the spammers and postmasters do not work whatsoever; the unsolicted email only increases. Best Regards, Greg Boop Engineering Manager Nortel Inc. --------------forwarded spam--------------- Received: from denmark-c.it.earthlink.net by bnr.ca id <19961203000539-0@bn= r.ca>; Mon, 2 Dec 1996 19:05:40 -0500 Received: from LOCALNAME (ip34.detroit2.mi.interramp.com [38.11.122.34]) by= denmark.it.earthlink.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA18281; Mon, 2 Dec 1= 996 11:55:03 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199612021955.LAA18281@denmark.it.earthlink.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: DREAM@HOTMAIL.COM To: rawlins@miandspring.com Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 15:11:51 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=3DUS-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: IF YOU'RE IN NEED OF A LIFESTYLE CHANGE Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a) You were referred to me as someone who may be interested in the following information,if you are not, please let us know, and we will promptly take your name off our mailing. I invite you to call me for more details at 1-800-995-0796 ext. 4192. This is a free 2 minute recording, so call right now! Prosperous regards, Ian Grover Not MLM/Serious Inquiries Only [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That number, 800-995-0796 is like a beehive -- a central service bureau -- for loads of these guys. Don't hesitate to call it as often as you are inspired to do so. In this case it is 'extension 4192' but we have had many of these with different extensions in the past. What happens is the company which operates the equipment charges back the cost of each call to their subscriber based on the extension number entered. Try not to punch in the wrong extension; if you do, who knows, one of last month's spammers may get charged for the call instead. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 15:03:47 GMT From: Peter Judge Subject: I-Phone Scam Spam Dear Pat, No doubt you already have this one (brief extract below - I can send the whole shebang if you like). I guess it's not too surprising that something as potentially confusing as Internet telephony can be wrapped up in mystification and turned into a scam (and of course a spam). Do you think these people actually have a product? I notice they are very quiet about how the other end of the phone link is set up; how the call jumps from the Internet to its destination. If this box exists at all, I assume it can only connect to similarly equipped phones ... Peter Judge Editor, Telecoms Newsline (mail to subs@hp.globalnews.com) ------- Forwarded scam follows ------- NEW GREAT INVENTION Representative Wanted IMMEDIATELY You can make USD $ 12,000 to $ 30,000 PER MONTH ------------- -------- --- ------ You can make this amount of money per month in your own country. In other countries, representatives are making this much. And some are making more money than that. This INVENTION is ONE of the GREATEST INVENTION of this DECADE! This GREAT INVENTION is: an electronic box which gives users FREE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE CALLS to any country in the world and between cities within your country. This NEW INVENTION is transforming telecommunications and how people around the world are making long distance telephone calls while REDUCING THEIR EXPENSES. It reduces expenses of individual users as well as business users. ------------------------------ From: Steven G. Bradley Subject: Connecting Non-PBX Line Powered Equipment to 24v Analog PBX Line Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 09:49:13 -0500 Organization: Southern Adventist University Reply-To: sbradley@southern.edu I have a model 706 AT&T line powered speakerphone that works poor to not at all at times due to lack of a full 48v. The analog PBX line supplies 24v I am told. Is there an interface I can buy that would let the PBX think 24v was ok and in use and yet increase it to a full 48v on the phone side of the equation? I'd love to use my speakerphone for it's full purpose and replacing it with one that is on AC or batteries really is not the solution I was thinking of. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Steven Bradley Southern Adventist University sbradley@southern.edu Information Services Home: 121 Cambridge Drive, Longwood, FL 32779-5707 (407) 862-7226 School: PO Box 569, Room A-4, Collegedale TN 37315-0569 (423) 238-3014 ------------------------------ From: wormley@step.mother.com (Steve Wormley) Subject: Local Numbers Into a PRI Date: 05 Dec 1996 02:21:49 GMT Organization: Mother.COM I'm looking for providers (long distance I suppose) who will provide local numbers in remote locations into a PRI/DID-T1 (ISDN preferred, analog only OK) i.e. Being able to spread numbers over a large area(30-50 communities) without dedicating full PRI's(T1s) or specific channels to certain locations, coming into our central location. (Preferably billed at a fixed cost, not based on per minute access.) (Yes this is for an ISP application; General location is Nothern California, possibly all of California.) Due to the prohibitive per-minute costs 800 service is not an option. Thanks, Steve Wormley Systems Administrator of Mother.COM E-Mail: wormley@mother.com Office:916.757.8070 ------------------------------ From: Barry Megdal Subject: Need Advice on Voicemail/Call Transfer Service Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 02:57:11 GMT Organization: EE Dept. Reply-To: bmegdal@caltech.edu I am involved with a business that is run out of two locations (two home offices). Yet I want customers to be able to call one number, and then get a message instructing them what key to hit to get the particular person they want to talk with. Since both people are not at the same place, in at least one case the call would have to be forwarded. Specifically, here is what I want: The phone is answered with "Thank you for calling XYZ Co. Press 1 to speak with Jim, and 2 to speak with Frank". The appropriate phone would then ring. If the phone is busy, I would like them to get voicemail for that individual. We have Pacific Bell service, so I thought their voicemail would be a natural choice. But it seems they can't do what I want. The best they could offer was this scenario: "Welcome to XYZ Co. Press 1 for Joe, 2 for Frank". When they hit 1, they get into Joe's private mailbox, and hear "Hi this is Joe. If you want to see if I am in, hit 5, else leave a message". Hitting 5 activates their "call transfer feature". Problem is the caller has to hear two levels of messages, and if Joe's phone ultimately turns out to be busy, they don't get back into voicemail (unless I add personal voicemail to Joe's phone as a separate feature). I could probably solve this with an on-site machine (PC-based or otherwise) that could be smart about forwarding calls. This may be how I have to do it, but it involves incoming and outgoing phone lines to the machine, and perhaps a limit of one call at a time being handled. Best would be if a third party could offer me this service (say via an 800 number, or otherwise). Any ideas? Thanks, Barry ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com Subject: Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Numbers) Date: 04 Dec 1996 18:19:21 GMT Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.13) In article , simg@netcom.com writes: > Even not all USA Direct numbers are accepting 0+500 & PIN calls. Most > of English language USA Direct lines do accept them most of the time. > I have yet to find an European country where "In Language" USA Direct > numbers accept reverse billing 500 numbers. My trouble ticket with > AT&T about this problem is still open. I have tried this from Sweden and Singapore, both work (020-79 56 11 and 8000 111111 respectively, I think.) But do NOT dial the "0", just hit 500-xxx-xxxx at least from Sweden. I do not know why, this is empirical. And yes, it does take the PIN. I had a problem in Singapore, I wanted my own 500 to forward to my rented cellphone. Now, all numbers in Singapore are seven digits, no area code, except cellphones, they are 9xxx xxxx! The AT&T computer refused to forward to an 8-digit number in Singapore, 7 digits worked. I called AT&T (it was about midnight Friday night EDT), and within less than two hours they fixed it. Then when I got a bill for all my calls to AT&T and my tests, I asked them to credit those calls, and they did! Hats off to this service! One problem, not AT&T's fault: Countries that do not allow third -country dialling on USA direct do not allow this use of 500 either. Singapore does not, so when I called myself to test, the network did the best it was allowed to and forwarded the call to my home phone, not the "third" country which was also Singapore - the cellphone. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 04:02:36 GMT From: jbutz@attmail.com (John J Butz) Subject: Re: AT&T True Connections 500 Number (was Purpose of 500 Numbers) Pat writes: > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But you have never yet seen any attempt > at portability for 700 numbers have you? Although 500/700 numbers can > certainly be handled the same way (portability) I do not think it will > ever happen with those two categories. PAT] 700 number portability won't happen because it doesn't make sense. Read on. Bellcore assigns each LD carrier a copy of the entire 700 number space (700- 000 thru 700-999). To reach a desired 700 number subscriber, the calling party must know and dial the Carrier Access Code of the carrier to which the 700 number subscriber gets their 700 number service from, before dialing the 700 number. Compare 700 number assignments to 500 and 900, where Bellcore assigns each carrier a slice of the space, where I believe the assignment is based on percentage market share. 500 number portability is plausible, though I think it must be looked at in a different light than 800 number portability. 800, 888, and 900 are service specific, either toll-free or enhanced service and a service subscriber can pretty much expect 800, 888 and 900 service [900 transport only, not the "heavy breathing" enhanced part] from each carrier to be similar. 500 and 700 are not as well defined. They were setup for "Personal Number Services," where each carrier is free to build their own "Personal Number Services." The implementation of PNS from carrier to carrier will likely be different. And by this I mean, different billable rates, different feature set, different user interfaces, etc. etc. 800/888 number portability means a customer wants a specific 800/888 number matched up with a specific carrier. 500 number portability, should it ever come around, means a customer wants a particular 500 number paired with a specific personal number service that just happens to be provided by carrier xyz. John Butz AT&T jbutz@attmail.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #646 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Dec 5 12:29:10 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA29838; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 12:29:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 12:29:10 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612051729.MAA29838@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #643 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Dec 96 12:29:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 643 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Calling Cards and BellSouth (Mark J. Cuccia) Ethernet Over Power Lines (Tim Dillman) SAIC Buying Bellcore - Spooks Have Your Number (Jamie Dyer) Re: 310/562 Split: It's Quiet in LA, Too (was 937 Area Code) (John Cropper) Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts (John Cropper) Re: I-Phone Scam Spam (Bruce Pennypacker) Wanted: GammaFax boards (David Michael) Genesys Labs User Group Wanted (Tim Zickus) Re: 800 Service and Cellphones (John R. Levine) Re: _Wired_ Article on Undersea Cables (Isaac Wingfield) NOTE: Issue 643 is being issued out of numerical sequence. Somehow it was accidentally skipped over when it should have been issued on Tuesday. File this in its correct place please. Following this issue we will go to 647 which is the next in line to go out. PAT 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 08:50:14 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: AT&T Calling Cards and BellSouth As has been happening over this past year, AT&T has been cancelling its calling-card honoring agreements with the traditional (US) LEC's. As of Sunday 1 December 1996, the mutual honoring agreement between AT&T and BellSouth was terminated -- actually terminated in 'one direction'. You can no longer use an *AT&T* issued calling card to place inTRA-LATA calls in BellSouth LATA's *if* you route the call via the BellSouth (LEC) inTRA-LATA network. You can still use the *AT&T* issued card to place such inTRA-LATA calls (as well as any inTER-LATA including international) *via AT&T* by using 10(10)ATT+0+ten-digits, or if you accessed AT&T with their 800-CALL-ATT, 800-3210-ATT or other 800/888 numbers AT&T might have to route to their OSPS. The AT&T cards which *used* to be accepted by BellSouth included the AT&T CIID-based cards including AT&T 'non-subscriber' cards which begin with the CIID/RAO 677. Other AT&T CIID/RAO cards not accepted anymore via BellSouth could include those which begin: 308, 503, 506, 507, 508, 677, 836 thru 838, 840 thru 848, 850, 851, 854 thru 858, 861 (AT&T/PR), 862 (AT&T/USVI), 863 thru 870, 874 thru 877, 879, 920, 924 (Unitel/AT&T-Canada), 925 thru 928. (There might be some other CIID's assigned to AT&T by Bellcore that I am presently unaware of; also, it could be possible that BellSouth might still accept some of these AT&T-issused RAO/CIID-based cards beginning with these RAO/CIID codes, I don't know exactly for sure) It also used to be that AT&T used Cincinnati Bell as a 'billing host or message routing RAO' for most of their CIID-based cards (including 861 for Puerto Rico and 862 for US Virgin Islands), but I'm not sure if that is still the case. AT&T-issued CIID-based cards beginning with: 503, 506, 507, 508 used BellSouth as the 'billing host or message routing RAO', however as RAO's, 503, 506, 507, 508 are assigned to some of the Cable & Wireless telcos in the Caribbean. In all cases, these first three digit codes are *NOT* to interpereted as an area code, but rather the first three-digits of a *CIID* code, similar to an *RAO* code. Determination of the first three digits (NXX) as an area code, as opposed to a CIID/RAO code is from the *second* set of three digits. In such RAO/CIID cards, the second set of three digits are of the form 1XX or 0XX. There are *no* assigned customer-dialable telephone numbers with 1XX or 0XX central office codes, not even in such mandatory ten-digit situations as 800/888/etc, 600, 500, nor 900, so there is no 'code-conflict' with regard to CIID/RAO-based cards (issued by local telcos as well as long-distance companies) vs. local telco-issued 'line-number-based' (i.e. beginning with an *area* code) fourteen-digit calling cards. RAO codes 'themselves' are of the format 0XX through 5XX. They are used for local telcos and long-distance companies to route various billing messages and other access charges between themselves. For calling-cards based on an RAO code, if the RAO 'itself' is of the format 0XX or 1XX, any *card* based on that RAO will begin with 6XX or 7XX, the '0' of the RAO code mapping over to the '6' as the beginning of the card number, the '1' mapping over to a '7'. Initial *customer* entry of a '0' at the calling-card 'bong' tone is (supposed) to 'cut-through' directly to a live human operator for assistance, while a leading entry (by a customer) of a '1' at the 'bong' tone is used/reserved for 1X/19X special automated billing request codes (11 for 'collect', 12 for 'third party', 13 for 'Person', 15 for 'sub-account' billing, 16 for Spanish language audio prompts, 17 for French language audio prompts, etc; these are the 'standard' assignments of these 1X/19X codes, but they are not necessarily all used everywhere, yet). The CIID's had 'initially' been assigned from the 8XX and 9XX pool of codes, unless the carrier requested a *particular* CIID code from the RAO card pool of codes, 2XX through 7XX. If that RAO code was not assigned, Bellcore could assign that three-digit code from the 2XX through 7XX pool to the long distance carrier who requested that code to be used as 'their' CIID for assigning 'standardized' calling cards. Note: *NO* CIID/RAO codes begin of the 88X nor 89X format. 88X codes have been used for billing/rating identification of the rural/remote non-dialable 'ring-down' locations in North America, while 89X is unassignable for NANP card purposes due to the 'permissive' customer entry of the *full* '89' International card number format at the 'bong' tone. AT&T (as well as many other carriers, including A-O-Slime) still accept the local telco issued *line-number* based cards. AT&T (and many other legit carriers as well?) accept local telco issued *non* line-number based (RAO based) cards for calls placed via its network, whether the call itself is inTRA or inTER LATA. The LEC's must allow 'non-discriminatory' access to their (LIDB) calling-card validation database system to any requesting or participating long distance carrier/operator. But AT&T doesn't necessarily have to allow anyone else access to its *own* card validation database. I tested the situation the other night. From a (LEC) payphone, I dialed 0+504+ a local seven digit number, *without* any 10(1X)XXX+ prefix. The call was routed to the BellSouth inTRA-LATA TOPS system. I then punched in my fourteen digit AT&T 'non-subscriber' calling card. Instead of getting a BellSouth recording telling me that my card was 'invalid', I got the prompt to "please hold for operator assistance", who then told me that the card was an AT&T-issued card, and BellSouth can't accept them anymore. She asked me if I wanted to bill to a valid BellSouth or other local telco issued card. I told her that I would redial the call with 10-288+, so as to go 'directly' to AT&T, thus 'bypassing' BellSouth. Other long-distance carriers have requested and been assigned 'CIID' codes from Bellcore, but I don't know how many of those other carriers actually issue such CIID-based cards. I also don't know if they are necessarily 'interoperable' between themselves and the LEC's inTRA-LATA operator/card systems. Interoperability between various carriers depends on business arrangements between the various carriers for mutual card-honoring and settlements. I do know that many other carriers do issue their own version of a 'line number' based card, or even an 'arbitrary' string of digits. Some of these carrier-issued cards or 'account' numbers are *not* necessarily all fourteen digits in length. These are *proprietary* card numbering or assignment schemes of each individual IXC. They are *not* going to be 'interoperable' with other carriers. And they are *not* part of the Bellcore/NANP standard of both line-number-based (NPA) cards, and non-line-number but RAO/CIID-based calling cards. Such includes AT&T, which offers its 'less-than-fourteen-digit' "True-Choice" card, which had *not* been accepted by BellSouth's operator systems on inTRA-LATA calls via the BellSouth network. However, there is *also* the *international* '89' card format, which may or may not be accepted between various carriers (I haven't yet really tried using any of my AT&T-issued cards for placing BellSouth TOPS-handled inTRA-LATA calls using the '89' format of the AT&T card). For card-issuing entities in the NANP, the '89' international card is of the format: '89' plus '1' (the country code of the NANP) plus a three-digit 'IIN' code (Issuer Identifier Number, assigned by the ITU), followed by the 'domestic' card number (whether fourteen digits or less). Many NANP-located card-issuing entities have *more-than-one* ITU-assigned IIN code, such as for differentiating between RAO/CIID-based cards, line-number-based cards, and 'proprietary' numbered cards. I knew that this change regarding AT&T cards not being accepted by the LEC was going to come to BellSouth, but I still can place inTRA-LATA calls billed to an AT&T-issed card 'directly' via AT&T with their 10(10)288 code or various AT&T 800/888 access numbers, or I can use my BellSouth card for such inTRA-LATA calls via BellSouth or AT&T. And my BellSouth (LEC) cards are also still accepted by AT&T for both inTER and inTRA LATA calls placed 'directly' over the AT&T network. ACRONYMS USED IN THIS ARTICLE: RAO = Revenue Accounting Office (most codes grandfathered in from the old Bell System, codes assigned by Bellcore beginning in 1984) CIID = Card Issuer IDentifier (codes assigned by Bellcore) IIN = Issuer Identifier Number (codes assigned by the ITU) TOPS = Traffic Operator Position System OSPS = Operator Service Position System LATA = Local Access and Transport Area LEC = Local Exchange Carrier (i.e. the local telco) IXC = Inter-Exchange Carrier (i.e. a long-distance company) MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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, 5 Dec 96 10:38 EST From: Tim Dillman <0006540276@mcimail.com> Subject: Ethernet Over Power Lines Dear Readers, I recently visited one of my customers to discuss future technologies and he brought up the wildest idea I have heard yet. It seems that the public utilities are using power lines as the transmission media for internal ethernet transmissions (or so he said). I was very skeptical about this notion but managed a smile and nod when my customer told me of this, but sill I wonder ... ... Can anyone confirm or dispel this idea? Tim Dillman Technical Consultant, MCI Communications ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 11:06:29 EST From: jamie@comet.net (Jamie Dyer) Subject: SAIC Buying Bellcore - Spooks Have Your Number Pat, This was on the cypherpunks list. It seemed apropos. Best, jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 01:45:00 -0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: SAIC buying Bellcore - Spooks have your number. The papers have been announcing recently that SAIC is buying Bellcore for ~$700M. SAIC is the spook-connected beltway bandit firm that recently bought the Network Solutions folks who run the Internet NIC. Bellcore is the Bell Labs spinoff that the RBOCs have jointly owned since the breakup of the Bell System a decade ago. One of the interesting things that Bellcore does is own and administer the North American Numbering Plan, which is the telephone numbering space for Country Code 1, including the US, Canada, and much of the Caribbean. (Mexico used to have a kluged subset of 1, but a few years ago decided to join with Latin America instead, gaining 5- prefixes.) So you want an Internet domain name? Ask SAIC. You want a phone number? Ask SAIC. It's nothing to get all paranoid about, probably, but it would be interesting to speculate what they can do with it, besides finding a post-Cold-War income stream. I wonder if the Ethernet address space or IPv4 or maybe IPv6 addresses are their next acquisition? ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: 310/562 Split: It's Quiet in LA, Too (was: 937 Area Code ...) Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 08:54:36 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com Robert McMillin wrote: > On 26 Nov 1996 20:38:29 PDT, David O. Laney > said: >> Ameritech here locally has sure kept the area code split between >> Cincinnati and Dayton pretty quiet. > IMHO, we have a similar problem here. I got my new Pacific Bell white > pages, only to find the area code split information hiding on the last > page. The GTE white pages, which mysteriously appear on my doorstep > each year, had this right up front. > BTW, permissive dialing starts January 25, 1996; the area changing to > 562 will be everything east of the Los Angeles River, i.e. Downey, > Norwalk, Long Beach, and parts of San Pedro. Compton, the South Bay > (including LAX), Santa Monica, and the Westside all stay 310. PacBell lost the overlay 'battle', while GTE accepted the CPUC decision either way. I wonder if Regina Costa (of TURN) is going to have to change HER area code ... she was one of the proponents of splits. John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 LINCS 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: It's Splits For Massachusetts Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 09:08:13 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com Jim Jacobs wrote: > I have a question to my friends in the Boston area. The 333 exchange > covers the west side of the town of Milton but is switched in Hyde Park. > Hyde Park will remain is 617 while Milton is going to 781. Unlike the 469 > prefix which has customers in West Roxbury (617), Brookline (617), and > Newton (781), the 333 prefix has only Milton residences and businesses > on it. Which area code will 333 wind up in? This is one of the issues (split borders) that the Massachusetts DPU will be reconciling early next year ... John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 LINCS 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ ------------------------------ From: Bruce Pennypacker Subject: Re: I-Phone Scam Spam Date: 5 Dec 1996 14:37:08 GMT Organization: Computer Telephony Group, Artisoft, Inc. > This INVENTION is ONE of the GREATEST INVENTION of this DECADE! > This GREAT INVENTION is: an electronic box which gives users FREE LONG > DISTANCE TELEPHONE CALLS to any country in the world and between > cities within your country. This NEW INVENTION is transforming > telecommunications and how people around the world are making long > distance telephone calls while REDUCING THEIR EXPENSES. It reduces > expenses of individual users as well as business users. Actually this technology does exist, so it's definately possible to connect from an internet phone to a "real" phone through a gateway. Dialogic, one of the industry leaders in high quality computer telephony hardware, announced an agreement a few months ago with an internet phone vendor for just such a system. Our company develops computer telephony software based on Dialogic hardware and we considered developing this type of system a while back. If you have any experience at all with computer telephony and internet telephony then it's really a fairly simple system to create. It's not a cheap system to set such a system up however. First you would need a fairly powerful PC with a high speed internet connection. You'd need to include the Dialogic hardware, which is also not cheap. As an extremely rough guess you could probably set up a system that can handle 8 simultaneous calls for $10,000 in hardware up front (PC and Dialogic hardware). Toss in around $800 to $1500 per month for a decent net connection and you're talking about a HUGE initial investment. As for the claim of raking in $30,000 a month, that sounds pretty rediculous to say the least. A service like this would have to charge it's uses less than prevailing long distance rates, so to net $30,000 a month you'd need to have an EXTREMELY high volume of calls. Personally I don't think AT&T, Sprint, MCI, etc. have much to worry about (yet) ... Bruce ------------------------------ From: David Michael Subject: WANTED GammaFax Boards Date: 5 Dec 1996 15:31:10 GMT Organization: OiT Ltd. Hi, I am after GammaFax boards -- willing to pay going rate. Would prefer CP4/LSI but will take anything. Regards, David Michael, Technical Director http://www.oit.net/~david OiT Ltd., Oxford OX4 2JZ, UK tel: +44 1865 785002 email: david@oit.net fax: +44 1865 785100 ------------------------------ From: zickus@ssnet.com (Tim Zickus) Subject: Genesys Labs User Group Wanted Date: 5 Dec 1996 09:42:32 -0500 Organization: SSNet, Inc. Public Internet Access in DE (302) 378-1386 I am interested in putting together an informal (for now) user group for folks using the Genesys Labs computer telephony software. Right now, I'm most interested in a web page or e-mail list. There is probably a lot to be gained by information sharing. :-) Send me an e-mail with your contact information, and if you like, what you're doing with Genesys, and I'll add you to my list of contacts as this moves forward. I'm not affiliated with Genesys Labs ... just a new customer. Tim Zickus "The very act of shortening the zickus@ssnet.com crane's legs disturbs the duck." http://www.ssnet.com/~zickus - Werner Heisenberg meets Chuang-Tzu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Dec 96 09:16 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: 800 Service and Cellphones Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Do all 800-providers require a dummy "address" for cellphones? They > should get a clue and realize that cellphones are, duh, MOBILE. Nope. My 800 provider will happily aim my 800 and 888 numbers at any phone number in the country, and they've never asked what kind of line it is. I had one of my numbers terminate on my cell phone for a while, worked fine, though of course most callers got "the cellular customer has left the service area." John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:57:52 -0700 From: isw@hdvs.com (Isaac Wingfield) Subject: Re: _Wired_ Article on Undersea Cables This reminded me of something I've had around for a long time, and I pulled it out and looked it over again. In 1957, an entire issue of the Bell System Technical Journal was devoted to the just-commissioned TAT-1 (the first Trans-Atlantic Telephone cable). It contained a series of somewhat technical but very readable articles on the various aspects of the design, construction, and installation of the cable. The articles were written by the engineers themselves, and (at least for a techno-history buff) are fascinating. Look for it in well-equipped libraries; it's worth finding. Here are some highlights: They thought about using transistors, but didn't have enough reliability data yet (they'd only been around for ten years or so ...), and they thought about those "new-fangled" high-mu, indirectly heated cathode vacuum tubes they had designed for the military during WW-2, but they weren't so sure about them, either, so they settled on 1930's vintage low-mu, directly heated triodes for the undersea repeaters, since there was good evidence that they'd last for the projected lifetime of the cable. Naturally, they built all the tubes themselves, and aged and tested them out the wazoo. Construction details are included. They didn't know enough about the reliability of plastic-film capacitors, so they designed and fabricated their own paper-and-castor oil insulated units, on which there was predictable reliability. Resistors got similar treatment. They looked into the contemporary manufacturing techniques for coaxial cable (that's what TAT-1 is, a single coax), and found that the concentricity wasn't sufficiently precise, so they designed a new, feedback-controlled extruder to get the accuracy they wanted, about ten times better than before. They knew that the attenuation of cable was different on the ocean floor than in the lab, and had means of dealing with it, as well as attenuation from aging. The end-to-end attenuation, unamplified, was a couple *thousand* decibels (I don't remember exactly), and the amplifiers had to compensate for this within a very small margin, a dB or less total, as I remember, or the system would not work. The deep-sea repeaters were "bulges" in the cable, rather like a rat in a snake. They were "solid" inside, to withstand the pressure; specially machined plexiglas pieces had cavities to accept the individual components. They were several feet long, and articulated so they could go through the cable-laying machinery on the ship. The design, fabrication, and testing of the mechanical aspects of the repeaters and their hermetic seals is a story by itself. All of the repeaters were "series-string" like Christmas tree lights. There were special devices that would "short around" a failed filament. B+ for the plates was derived from the voltage drop across all the filaments in a repeater, something under 100 volts. The cable was powered by two high-voltage constant current sources, one at each end; one was "positive" and the other "negative". By upping the current over time, aging of tubes could be compensated. The power supplies, covered in a separate chapter, were by no means the simplest aspect of the system. They could deal with hundreds of volts of "offset" caused by solar flares or other phenomena. There's a chapter on the selection of the route for the cable (not the shortest possible, and for good reasons, including security). There were contour maps of the seafloor included with the journal, showing the selected path. The cable was powered and under test for the entire time it was being layed; a special shipboard power unit was designed for the task. Each of the thirty or forty repeaters included special circuitry to allow its gain to be individually tested, without interrupting service. As laying proceeded, "build-out" sections of cable were added to the runs between repeaters to achieve the attenuation-gain equality mentioned above. Some parts of the system (short runs, and shallow water) were designed and laid by the British Post Office; their techniques are rather different from the Bell System's, and are covered in their own chapters. Reading this, one of the most impressive things to me, is the degree and depth of *anticipation* of potential problems. I have long believed that excellent engineering results from properly dealing with second order effects, and this design did that in spades! It just confirms a couple of my long-held beliefs: 1) The military just *thinks* they know about reliability; these guys *really* understood it. 2) The monolithic "Bell System" never did *anything* on a whim; there was a firm technical justification for every aspect of any design they did. So, this was written as TAT-1 was just put in service. Does anyone know about its actual service period, or when it was decommissioned, or have any more information on it? Isaac Wingfield Staff System Engineer isw@hdvs.com Hyundai Digital Video Systems Vox: 408-232-8530 3103 N. First Street Fax: 408-232-8145 San Jose, CA 95134 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #643 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Dec 5 17:35:32 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA00853; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:35:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:35:32 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612052235.RAA00853@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #647 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Dec 96 17:35:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 647 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson News From the Front: The SPAM Battles Rage On (oldbear@arctos.com) Re: More Spam Email With 800 Number (John Cropper) Re: I-Phone Scam Spam (John R. Levine) Re: ScamBusters Spammer (John Cropper) Re: 800 Service and Cellphones (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: COCOT 800-Access Charges (Nils Andersson) Re: SAIC Buying Bellcore - Spooks Have Your Number (Steve Michelson) Re: Area Code Splits - Why? (Eric Bohlman) Re: Area Code Woes (Craig Macbride) Further Notes on Use of 555 (Kelly Daniels via John Cropper) Help B92 Under Siege! (Drazen Pantic) ISDN & Computer Telephony Questions (Robert Wheeler) Listing Wanted of Service Codes/Features (Al Rubottom) Caryl Chessman Executed in 1960 Due to Wrong Number (Carl Moore) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 12:44:43 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: News From the Front: The SPAM Battles Rage On The Voters' Telecommunications Bill Watch maintains an interesting web site which tracks legislation and litigation related to telecom. The current "casewatch" sections looks at the litigation between AOL and Cyberpromo and between Concentric and CyperPromo. It also provides useful background material and explanation of the legal precedents which both sides are trying to invoke. The page is at: URL: http://www.vtwctr.org/casewatch/current/ Also, on the topic of SPAM, I received a piece of junk mail promoting mass mailing software from a domain MAILLOOP.COM in Florida. When I checked the domain in the internic RS directory, it showed that it is being serviced by an outfit/individual in San Francisco which operates at least two boiler-plated servers as NANCYNET.COM and SALLYNET.COM. Admin contacts for these two domains are identified as being GC29-ORG and MC76-ORG which, when queried in the internic database, should list all affiliated entities -- but instead, the RS directory just mysteriously hangs, resulting in the telnet session to RS having to be terminated. Possibly the list of affiliates is just too long and the session times out; possibly there is something imbedded in the list which hangs the RS server; or, possibly I just hit RS at a time which this function was down. Any thoughts? By the way, all of these domains were created on November 23 and 26, so they certainly a wasting no time starting to spam from them. Regards, The Old Bear [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for providing us with a few more things to be added to our mail filters. Pretty soon the list of sites we do not wish to hear from will be larger than the list of those we are corresponding with. A sign of the net of the nineties I guess ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: More Spam Email With 800 Number Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 09:00:25 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That number, 800-995-0796 is like > a beehive -- a central service bureau -- for loads of these > guys. Don't hesitate to call it as often as you are inspired to do > so. In this case it is 'extension 4192' but we have had many of > these with different extensions in the past. What happens is > the company which operates the equipment charges back the cost > of each call to their subscriber based on the extension number > entered. Try not to punch in the wrong extension; if you do, > who knows, one of last month's spammers may get charged for the > call instead. That is probably either MCI's, Sprint's, or Excel's 'personal 800' service with voicemail, where they cram 10,000 people into an 800 number for $x a month, plus usage ... If so, it would take a great deal of volume to run up the bill ... John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 LINCS 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually I think (not certain) that particular 800 number belongs to a company in southern Illinois -- down by St. Louis -- which is quite friendly with spammers and other junk-email, chain letter, business opportunity enthusiasts. I think the company pays the phone bill and then pro-rates it among the spammers, etc who give out information via their 'extensions' on the voicemail system attached. Even if it is big, high-volume account, so what? Netters have always been responsive to challenges tossed at them. As long as there is no hacking or phreaking, which is illegal, that number can be called. I'd like to learn about some of hundreds (thousands?) of ways to Make Money Fast they talk about. I suspect one could have a complete tutorial on spam/scam techniques in the privacy of one's own home for the cost of a call to an 800 number plus maybe a speakerphone and an autodialer. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Dec 96 14:26 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: I-Phone Scam Spam Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Actually this technology does exist, so it's definitely possible to > connect from an internet phone to a "real" phone through a gateway. Also keep in mind that if you're delivering phone calls to the POTS network, your phone company will insist that you get a FG A line (electrically the same as a regular line, financially extremely different) and pay per-minute charges for all calls. If you're serious about the phone business, depending on where your calls go, this can actually be a reasonable deal. Around here, intra-LATA POTS calls cost as much as 20 cents/minute, but an outgoing FG trunk costs 2 cents/min. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: ScamBusters Spammer Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 22:50:57 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com Dave Keeny wrote: > Another "outing" of a particularly unethical e-mail spammer ... > The message itself was sent from BellSouth's network via a Miami > dialup. The people at Internet ScamBusters know what happened and are > looking at the legalities involved. Clearly fraud was intended, but I > have no idea if laws cover this particular type of fraud. Wire fraud, for one, harassment for another (unwelcome communication is still harassment, regardless of medium.) John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 LINCS 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ ------------------------------ From: cgordon@worldnet.att.net (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Subject: 800 Service and Cellphones Date: 5 Dec 1996 07:53:32 GMT Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services PAT sez: > ... Often times the 800 side gets > charged even if the cell phone does not answer, etc. Calls routed > through 800 ==> cell phone as a result are quite expensive. There > certainly is no technical reason it cannot be done. PAT] My 800 number terminates on my office phone, which is set up to forward (if busy or not answered) to my cellular phone. I then ordered voicemail on the cellphone. (To retrieve voicemail from my desk, I pick up the phone and dial my own number -- which is busy so it goes to cellular -- which is turned off so it goes to voicemail; I enter my code and pull in messages. No airtime charges for retrieving messages this way.) So, calls to my 800 number _do_ end up on the cellphone, and neither the cellular carrier nor the 800 carrier even have to know about it. Unanswered calls go to voicemail and don't incur any cellular charges. WRT the expense. Well, yes, I am billed for both the 800 time and the cellular airtime, but only when I actually answer an 800 call on the cellphone. Seems to me this would be pretty obvious, though. OTOH, the cellular voicemail costs only $4.95 a month, whereas Ameritech wants $12.95. Gordon S. Hlavenka O- cgordon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: COCOT 800-Access Charges Date: 5 Dec 1996 17:49:31 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com In article , dstott@juno.com (Dave J Stott) writes: > That's real world. We're not poor, we're not COCOT dependent, we're > not interested in market-based pricing vs government regulation. All > we care about is that my teenager can call home from where ever she > is, even if she forgets her quarter. I will blow off this ONCE more about this issue, and then I will shut up, I promise. The previous poster makes a good argument that "free 800" is not just an issue of money but of convenience/assessibility, as you do not always carry the right coins. This is true, granted. This does not, however, solve the underlying problems. I firmly believe that payphone operators have a right to be reimbursed for any service they provide (just like the rest of us). There are various ways of doing this, having them being reimbusred by the owners of the 800 numbers, collectively or selectively or any which way is fine with me, on an owner-of-800 selects reimburesement or whatever. What irks me is the entitlement philosophy of the various posters, that they have a "right" to use somebody else's equipment without any payment. The fact that the marginal cost is close to zero does not matter. There are two main arguments why this attitude is flawed, one is on principle, the other is pragmatic. Pragmatic: With the advent of prepaid calling cards for as little as USD 5.00, more and more of the payphone traffic will be 800. When it has gone 90% to 800, nobody will be willing to put up payphones, except as part of a larger service, like the restrooms in a restaurant. Pity, payphones are very useful. A lot of pay phones were installed years ago, when prepaid phone cards were rare. I hear people agonizing over the windfall payphone operators would reap if they were to be able to charge for 800. Do I hear anybody cry over their lost revenue as more and more calls go to 800? On Principle: Is it really such an antisocial act to provide a service for a fee (coin-paid access to phone lines) without at the same time providing a free service (access to 800 etc), that we need to call in federal troops to deal with such malfeasants? Let me make an experiment of thought: Assume that I live in an area that is next to a shopping district, say. What if I put up a set of phones in my driveway, with a simple box that kept the phone connected, the box being coin-operated, 25c per minute (high, that is the point). I would allow you to rent my phone and the line to dial 1-800-xxx-xxxx, 1-888-xxx-xxxx, 0-xxx-xxx-xxxx, 01-xx-xx......, 10xxx-0-xxx-xxx-xxxx etc, but no paid by originating phone type calls, i.e. I would have all toll calls blocked. I would allow local calls as included in the per minute charge. (Remember we are not dealing with local issues such as if this may be a public nuisance, but with the federal issue of access to phone lines). By the way, I would be neither surprised nor disappointed not upset if the payphone business went this way, to the view of equipment rental, with the toll charges being a separate item, so the example is in my view not so abstract. Another experiment: I fit my car with a couple of car phones, and stand in a busy parking lot out in the boonies where some event is being organized. I sell celltime for USD 1 a minute, I would allow all calls that are local to the cellnet (usually the metro area adjacent), as well as 800 and third party etc, i.e. the cellphones would be toll-blocked. My question for each of these scenarios is not whether you think this is a great idea for the seller or for the buyer, but whether you truly believe I would be such a public enemy that I should be removed by the army! After all, I FAILED TO PROVIDE FREE 800! OFF WITH MY HEAD! Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: Steve Michelson Subject: Re: SAIC Buying Bellcore - Spooks Have Your Number Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 13:02:22 -0500 Organization: AT&T Jamie Dyer wrote: > So you want an Internet domain name? Ask SAIC. You want a phone > number? Ask SAIC. It's nothing to get all paranoid about, probably, > but it would be interesting to speculate what they can do with it, > besides finding a post-Cold-War income stream. I understand your point, but to be completely accurate, it's important to note that the North American Numbering Plan (NANP) Administrator (i.e., Bellcore, or eventually SAIC) assigns only area codes, not complete phone numbers. By the way, they also assign point codes (or portions thereof) for SS7 networks. Steve Michelson ------------------------------ From: ebohlman@netcom.com (Eric Bohlman) Subject: Re: Area Code Splits - Why? Organization: OMS Development Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 19:06:13 GMT Robert McMillin (rlm@netcom.com) wrote: > Do you mean to force people to buy $100-200 worth of hardware if they > want additional phone lines? How would the lines be delivered? > Doesn't analog DID require a trunk bundle to be hauled to the > customer? Who and in what manner is this to be paid for? Assuming that the customer just needs several separate *numbers* (rather than the ability to handle several *calls* at the same time), $100-$200 would be less than the yearly cost of 5 or more lines. I'm pretty sure that the protocol that's used to deliver Caller ID information from the CO to the subscriber can be extended to handle delivery of the number actually dialed (IIRC, there's a "type" field for which CID is just one option). I actually have a mini-version of this on my office line. I have three numbers with distinctive ring patterns all coming into the same line. One of them is my regular business number, one is my fax number (my fax traffic is too low to justify having a separate line) and one is pointed to by my 800 number (so when I get a voice call I can tell if I'm paying for it). I use a $60 "Ring Decipher" box to split the fax number from the voice numbers. Another thing that could relieve number congestion: a lot of residential customers get a line solely for modem use, and it's almost always used purely for outgoing calls. Why should such a line need a number at all? Why can't the LECs offer an "anonymous" outgoing-only line? ------------------------------ From: craig@rmit.EDU.AU (Craig Macbride) Subject: Re: Area Code Woes Date: 3 Dec 1996 23:41:18 GMT Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) writes: > (Somehow people are going to have to let go of the idea that an > area code means something in terms of geography and community > identity. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com) An unfortunate situation, if it gets that way. It is hard enough already to tell how much a call will cost to any given US phone number and whether it will be local or not from a variety of places nearby. > A plan to be considered by the California Public Utilities Commission > would add an area code to San Jose, splitting Willow Glen along > Hamilton and Pine avenues. Okay, this is obviously happening all over the US, but why not just increase the telephone numbers from seven digits to eight? That would give a particular area code ten times the capacity, most people would need to dial one more (instead of three more) digits, and nobody would have to go through all the confusion over area code splits. > Another plan would not change the portions of Santa Clara County in > the 408 code, which is expected to run out of numbers in 1999 because > of the explosion of cellular phones, computer modems, fax machines and > pagers. I have seen no sane reasons for cellular phone numbers to be included in geographical area codes, since they are not relevant to geography, whereas home and business phone numbers are ways to contact a phone in a particular geographical location. If cellular numbers were allocated their own nationwide area codes, they would not impact on the geographical area codes which they don't logically belong in anyhow. Why not have pagers on their own area code(s) as well, if that would help? It would be far more understandable if specific non-phone services were accessed differently, than to have everything thrown into one pot, and then have the pot splitting in unpredictable ways all over the place. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: People like that, who 'simply wouldn't > call a person or office in a different area code ...' really are > ignorant. Yes, but there are lots of ignorant people around, and for a variety of reasons. What about all the people from interstate or overseas who see a number with a different area code to the one they are in and don't know it is a local call? The chances are they will avoid calling it and the only way to alleviate this would be to not have area code splits like this. Craig Macbride URL: http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~craigm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Dec 1996 17:13:26 -0500 From: Kelly Daniels Subject: Further Notes on Use of 555 Forwarded to the Digest by John Cropper. Kelly Daniels writes: I was co-chair for non-LEC co-chairs of the 555 assignment guidelines. Our intent, along with many other carriers was to make the 555 number range not available to anything but Directory Assistance, as it had been suggested by BELLCORE for over twenty years (BOC Notes On The LEC Network). Some disgruntled 900 and 976 (rightfully so) users of these information lines and vanity numbers (by the way, LERG lists 70 other NXX to use) wanted to use the 555 number range to replace failures (again, not their fault) of 900 and 976. Nobody but the LECs agreed with this interpetation. Several companies have worked to make sure that if LECs can roll-out vanity 555 numbers, then other carriers can roll-out products for DA companies. This type of competative posistioning is what is causing 555 to be a bust for non-DA companies and DA companies alike. 555 will fail for all who ever though of a good use (whether DA or non-DA). Kelly ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 12:16:10 +0000 From: Drazen Pantic Subject: Help B92 Under Siege! On December 3 1996 Serbian authorities sent a letter to independent Radio B 92 which effectively banned that radio from broadcasting. The radio transmitter was then turned off. Radio B 92 has been the only source of independent information in the Yugoslav capital of Belgrade. Radio B 92 strongly opposed the war-mongering policy of the Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, thoughout the Yugoslav wars, vigourously supporting the principls of freedom and democracy. The ban means an end to independent broadcasting through electronic media in Serbia, furthermore threatening the overall stability in the region, especially in Bosnia. In the name of democracy, human rights and the freedom of expression, Radio B 92 calls on people of goodwill to do their utmost to support those principles and lobby all relelvent organsiastion, governmental and non-governmental, to re-instate radio B 92s right to broadcast. Send your support to: vesti@opennet.org Read B92 news on: http://www.siicom.com/odrazb Many thanks, B92 STAFF ------------------------------ From: robert@symbolic.com (Robert Wheeler) Subject: ISDN & Computer Telephony Questions Date: 5 Dec 1996 19:20:28 GMT Organization: Symbolic Systems, Inc. Dear Professionals: We are interested in putting together a Call Center utilizing ISDN Bri lines into a terminal Adapter card inside a PC running Windows 95. We are looking for any Computer Telephony Software for ISDN that will run on a Windows 95 platform. If anyone has information, please contact me: mailto:robert@symbolic.com Thank you for your time and consideration. Robert Wheeler ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 13:09:03 PST From: Al Rubottom Subject: Listing Wanted of Service Codes/Features Seeking information, as comprehensive as possible, on all the options available on currently available telco service (POTS or variations one is likely to encounter in most parts of this country). Specifically I want information on all the "optional features" that one can invoke, either free of charge or on a charge-per-use fee basis (or by ordering the service), such as the "turn off Call Waiting" option, the "dial last caller's number" option, the "remove Caller ID blocking" option, and so on. Thanks for your, as ever, expert help! Al Rubottom /\ alrub@inetworld.net tel: 619.292.9998 /\ fax: 619.541.2260 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Dec 96 18:58:25 GMT From: Carl Moore Subject: Caryl Chessman Executed in 1960 Due to Wrong Number Drawing international attention at the time, Caryl Chessman went to his death in the San Quentin gas chamber on May 3, 1960. Foreign papers (I looked up the London Times), and the New York Times in detail, noted that a last-minute stay (of 30 minutes or an hour) was not implemented because of a WRONG NUMBER! The judge had transmitted the prison telephone number to his secretary via several persons, but a digit was dropped and the secretary had to verify the correct prison number. Because of that telephone-number delay, the pellets had already been dropped by the time the call got through. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So would you think this is one more reason to abolish or seriously reconsider the use of the death penalty or would you say it is important to hire effecient secretaries? Or both? For readers too young to remember him, Chessman was a bad guy in the 1950's here in the USA. At least we thought at the time he was pretty bad. Mild by today's standards perhaps. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #647 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Dec 6 01:40:11 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA10179; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 01:40:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 01:40:11 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612060640.BAA10179@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #648 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Dec 96 01:40:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 648 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Yet Another PAY-per-Call (was Re: Further Notes on 555) (Mark J. Cuccia) WebTV Sad Story (Dave Sieg) COCOTs and 800 Numbers (Ken Levitt) COCOT 800/888 Charges (Linc Madison) Your Call Could Not Be Completed (Jim St. John) Are Email Spams Profitable? (Lisa Hancock) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 18:54:19 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Yet Another PAY-per-Call (was Re: Further Notes on Use of 555) In the original article by Kelly Daniels (telco@teleport.com) forwarded by John Cropper : > I was co-chair for non-LEC co-chairs of the 555 assignment guidelines. > Our intent, along with many other carriers was to make the 555 number > range not available to anything but Directory Assistance, as it had > been suggested by BELLCORE for over twenty years (BOC Notes On The LEC > Network). Some disgruntled 900 and 976 (rightfully so) users of these > information lines and vanity numbers (by the way, LERG lists 70 other > NXX to use) wanted to use the 555 number range to replace failures > (again, not their fault) of 900 and 976. > Nobody but the LECs agreed with this interpetation. > Several companies have worked to make sure that if LECs can roll-out > vanity 555 numbers, then other carriers can roll-out products for DA > companies. > This type of competative posistioning is what is causing 555 to be a > bust for non-DA companies and DA companies alike. 555 will fail for all > who ever though of a good use (whether DA or non-DA). It just *seems* to me that one of the primary intents of the additional use of 555 or NPA-555 (except for the 'SAC' NPA's of 800/888, 900, 700, 600, 500, 456, etc) was for yet another backdoor entry of PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call numbers which would confuse and *FLEECE* the general public. I remember when South Central Bell first began the local 976 prefix in the New Orleans area, circa 1984. The very first local 976 number I saw was in a newspaper advertisement, as 976-TIME. It gave the time and temperature, followed by a weather forecast. The newspaper advertisement was *DELIBERATELY* done by the 976 number-holder in the *SAME LAYOUT* that South Central Bell (BellSouth) was using at that time. Also, knowing that there couldn't be any EXchange names in the 'good-olde-days' for the 55X (although San Francisco did have KLondike-x, and KL5 was used as a 'generic' named exchange in radio/TV/movie fiction), 57X, 95X, 97X ranges, and these ranges were frequently reserved by telco for test purposes (local switch-based ringback/ANAC/ANI/testboard/etc), I assumed that Bell had started up a new "mass calling" service that *THEY THEMSELVES* provided. I dialed 976-TIME from my parents' phone a few times, and liked the idea of this 'new' number for Time/Temp/Weather. However ... I looked again at the newspaper ad, and did *NOT* see any logos or name of South Central Bell. I also noticed the *FINE PRINT* at the bottom of the boxed advertisement, which stated '20-cents a call, plus any applicable tolls'. I called up the Operator (AT&T's TSPS at that time, which also handled all 0- inTRA-LATA assistance for Bell) to inquire. She told me that 976 numbers were *customer dial only*, available from 'POTS' residential and business lines. A 'vendor' provided the service, not the telephone company, and there 'could' be a charge for calling such 976 numbers, each one at a rate set by the 'vendor'. Over the next several weeks, I began to notice radio/TV/print ad's for *MORE* 976 numbers for financial updates, sports scores, horoscopes, 'soap' updates, 'romance' (heavy breathing so-called 'adult' lines, I had assumed), etc. There were even 976 numbers to "call Santa" or for the kiddies to 'hear a story from storyland'. Each 976 number carried a charge, which varied from 20-cents to *well* over a dollar. I also began to notice that 976 numbers were popping up all over the US, in both the now-divested Bell System, and in 'independent' non-Bell telco territory. And I saw news stories on TV about parents and other consumers furious over the fact that telco either would *NOT* block access to 976, or the *CHARGED* for blocking access to 976. Imagine that ... something we did NOT ask for, and being charged (and in some cases, OH BOY what a charge) for even accidentally dialing it, or being charged a monthly fee to BLOCK access to it! Since 976 was a 'local' NXX 'central office' code, it was up to each individual state regulatory agency to 'set the rules' regarding 976 services, as well as blocking access to 976. In 1988, the Louisiana PSC changed the charges to BLOCK access to 976 from (at that time) a 'one-time' service ordering fee of $22.00, plus $2.00/month, to a *one-time* fee of 'just' $5.00. However, if you requested blocking during a ninety day period from the PSC issuing the order, you wouldn't have to pay ONE CENT to have 976 access restricted! New customers, and customers who moved would also have 'free blocking' if they requested it within ninety days of initiating service or activating a 'move'. I then began to see a 'decline' in the local promotion of 976 numbers! Also, while the 900 Special Area Code was assigned by AT&T circa 1970 for 'mass calling' purposes, I'd never seen any use of 900 numbers until the Spring of 1977 CBS Radio call-in special three-hour program, on a Saturday afternoon, hosted by Walter Cronkite. This program was a call-in to ask questions of or make comments to then-president Jimmy Carter. The radio broadcast originated live from the White House, and the call-in number was 900-242-1611. Incidently, back in the 1970's, AT&T Long-Lines assigned the 900-NNX 'central office' codes on a *geographic* basis. 900-242 translated to NPA 202, Washington DC's area code. Incidently, there was absolutely *NO CHARGE* to call (or attempt to call) then President Carter and Walter Cronkite with this 900 number. It was even free from payphones. And at that time, COCOT's did *NOT* exist! Of course, the payphones in Louisiana were 'coin-first' -- i.e. you had to drop in an initial deposit to 'ground-start' the payphone before getting dialtone, but on 'free' (800, Business Office, at-that-time-even 411 Information, etc) or 'deferred payment' (collect, third-party, card) calls, you got your initial deposit back. So, while I did need to drop in a nickel (yes, Louisiana's initial deposit for local calls were still just five-cents, until 1979), I got the nickel back when the TSPS operator came in on the line to complete the call. Of course, I never even got to the talk-show's call-screener at the White House or at CBS News Network Radio Operations in DC ... all I got was 'SIT tones' from the Bell System toll switch and "all circuits are busy now". The purpose of 900 in the 1970's was similar to local 'choke' central office codes when calling such high-incoming-volume numbers as radio stations request-lines, talk-lines, contest lines; or ticket ordering lines, etc. Remember, this was still the days of #4AXB toll switches and XB-Tandem, as well as MFKP address signalling and 2600 Hz supervisory signalling. Database-lookup routing technology, ESS/Digital toll switches, and 'common channel signalling' were just being introduced into the Bell System's DDD network in the later 1970's. The 900 SAC was a code to be given out to the general public, which had a translation as a 'choke' code. Between 1980 and 1982, the Bell System DDD toll network was being heavily enhanced with CCIS#6 signalling, databases, and ESS/Digital toll switches. The 900 SAC's purpose was changed from simply being a 'mass-calling' choke code to the new 'Dial-It' service. After the 1977 CBS-Radio call-in show with Cronkite and Carter, I didn't notice any 900 numbers until around 1983, when you could dial up a 900-410-xxxx number to hear live audio from the Space Shuttle. The TV news mentioned that it would cost 50-cents the first minute, and 35-cents each additional minute. Also at that time, I started to see more and more 900 numbers mentioned on TV/Radio/print. 900-555-xxxx had *only* -1212, which was a recording from AT&T listing many available 900 numbers. It was free at the time. The TSPS operator told me that 900-200-xxxx numbers were 'free', 900-410-xxxx numbers were 50c first min with 35c each additional min, and other 900-NXX code numbers were 50c per call. Well, that was the beginning of PAY-per-call. It seemed somewhat 'innocuous' at first, but by 1986, I began to see some AT&T-handled 900 numbers costing $1.50 the first minute with 50c each additional minute. I asked the AT&T operator for a rate breakdown, as each AT&T 900-NXX code had its own set charge. Some 900-NXX codes had charges of $20.00 per call! By 1987 or 1988, the AT&T TSPS operator couldn't give me a breakdown of charges by the simple 900-NXX code, as charges had become even more subdivided and varied, defined as far down as the 'thousands' or even 'hundereds' digit of the line number! And then Bellcore began assigning 900-NXX codes to *other* carriers about this time, as well, each carrier doing whatever it seemed to want with doling out 900 services, each at its own varied and wild rates. You *could* get 900 access BLOCKED from your phone, but at a cost (at that time) of a one-time fee of $22.00, plus $2.00/month. Eventually (I think it was in November of 1990) that the FCC stated that telcos could NOT charge customers to have 900 (or even local 976 and other locally defined NXX pay-per-call special c/o codes) blocked. So, as more money/charging-conscious customers began to BLOCK access to these PAY-per-call numbers/codes, it seemed to me that the PAY-per-call 'info' (?) entities seemed to come up with other ways to FLEECE the general public. There was that 'chat-line' with its ridiculous charge which was dialed over Allnet, using Allnet's 700 SAC, as 10-444-1-700-777-7777. The TV and radio commercials quoted it as "one-oh-four; four-four-one; seven-hundered; and then seven sevens!". Of course, I wrote the number down, and parsed the digits the way they SHOULD be parsed, and saw what one was dialing. Over the past few years, we've seen International PAY-per-call scams, some in the NANP Caribbean, and some to numbers (but not necessarily locations) outside of the NANP. We've seen 'pay-per-call' 800 which I believe uses realtime ANI to 'get' your number, and then attempts to bill-back to you, charging you for 'bogus' voicemail/paging/conference services! BTW, COCOTS and their associated AOSlime are just as bad with their rates and charges! In recent years, probably since many customers BLOCK access to 'known' PAY-per-call codes, the 'info' providers have requested local assignment of previously unused N11 three-digit codes! In Louisiana, the dominant newspaper in each LATA provides an 'info' line, for 50-cents/call on 211. In Georgia and Florida, I think that Cox Cable or the newspaper provides a similar service (?) on 511. I don't know about Florida or Georgia, but in Louisiana, we can get 211 blocked at no extra charge. In early 1994, I received an Information Letter (IL), free (at that time) from Bellcore NANPA indicating the proposal of 555-xxxx numbers. However, Bellcore NANPA was only going to be the 'line number assignment' authority, and not the regulatory enforcement agency, nor the technical interconnection body regarding implementation of 555-xxxx numbers. But from the beginning, I knew that the PAY-per-call entities would begin to use 555. It used to be that calls to legitimate directory assistance in any area code was FREE, when using (NPA)-555-1212. Of course, while we do now have to pay to call directory, it is still a 'legit' telco-provided service. Also, the telco *itself* provided certain other services (business office extensions, repair service departments or extensions) in some areas using 555-xxxx numbers. Some areas have used different 555-xxxx numbers for language-specific (Spanish, French, etc) Business Office or Repair Service. Such 555-xxxx assignments have been 'grandfathered' in when it was announced that 555 was going to be assigned to 'info' providers. But if the bulk of 555-xxxx numbers were going to become mirror images of PAY-per-call local 976-xxxx numbers, local N11 codes, SAC 900-NXX-XXXX numbers, etc, one might want to BLOCK all access to the 555 prefix. However, since telco doesn't really yet allow blocking against "all but specific -xxxx line numbers", one would most likely be restricting access to the entire range of ten-thousand line numbers in the 555 prefix, including -1212 for directory. Even though now charged, directory assistance might be something one would NOT want to restrict access to. Since there will continue to be a PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call 'info' (?) industry, they should STICK TO ONE special NPA code, 900. The local 976 prefix should be *reclaimed* for POTS number assignments in every NPA in the NANP. IMO, The N11 codes should have NEVER been used in the way some areas are now using them. Since the only real three-digit N11 code that has any REAL universal assignment or reservation is 911 (altho' some locations don't yet offer 911 service), the codes 211 through 811 should be used as 'POTS' central office codes. Local directory could be provided as (Home NPA) plus 555-1212. Repair Service and Business Office in South Central Bell's five-state territory have never really used 611 nor 811 (respectively). Since the mid-80's, we have used 557-xxxx numbers for various departments of Repair Service or Business Office. Also, most local telcos have 800 or 888 numbers to reach such departments. The 555 prefix is just one NXX 'central office' code out of almost eight hundered possible in any area code. If the *only* -xxxx line-numbers assigned from it in most/all (non-SAC) NPA's was -1212 for directory and a few other local telco departments or services, it isn't really using up such a large amount of the supposedly rapidly depleting numbering space. Again, I believe that those who wanted to use 555 (and the N11's) in other ways have a hidden agenda to turn 555 (and the N11's) into yet another PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call dialing code or prefix, as more customers of the general public are trying to BLOCK access to 900, 976, etc. Pat, and all ... I know that this was long, and maybe I have rambled. But I am SICK AND TIRED of people being nickeled and dimed (and dollared) to death by such 'info' providers, particularly when one *accidently* dials such a number and has to go through a whole song-and-dance to get it credited! Same applies regarding the PAY-PAY-PAY-PHONIES (COCOTS) and their associated A-O-Slime! And even the 'legit' telcos and long-distance companies aren't always paragons of virtue neither, but at least in many ways, they have more recently tried to offer free blocking capabilities. But one has to always keep up with whatever backdoor someone is trying to enter through! :( MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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, 05 Dec 1996 21:07:42 +0000 From: Dave Sieg Reply-To: dave@tricon.net Organization: Zeta Image, Inc. Subject: WebTV Sad Story I had an interesting phone call from a guy who had bought one of the "WebTV" boxes. It sits on the top of the TV and hooks to a phone line, allowing "unlimited Internet Access" for only $19.95/month". This guy had MS and was bedridden, so this seemed perfect for him. He paid $450 for the box and wireless keyboard, hooked it up, and started surfing the web. Now he has discovered that the box is making long distance calls at 10-15 cents/minute! He had already run up a sizeable phone bill! He was calling me because I operate a local ISP, and he wanted to have the box call our service. I phoned the WebTV 800 number and was told that the "local call" for my area was over 100 miles away (long distance). I explained the problem, and was given a number for Philips in the DC area. I spoke with a representative of the CDI project, and she said they were having the same problem. She gave me the number for WebTV in California. I finally got through to the person she recommended I talk to, and he said that WebTV covers 90% of the US. I said that the 90% of the US represents about 10% of the land area, and that the non-metro areas still make up a sizeable number of people who will buy the box, run up huge phone bills, only to get an extremely bad taste in their mouth for WebTV, and return the box for a refund. Wouldn't it make sense for WebTV to have a deal for local ISP's to be able to provide the access, and help them sell the boxes? WebTV apparently is considering working with local ISP's, but only a select few, and only on the basis of paying a few bucks/month for their users to be able to dial in for "unlimited access". In our part of the world, business lines cost nearly $70/month, and we have had our bad experience with the abuse of "unlimited" accounts. It simply doesn't make sense for any local ISP to permit somebody to use his dialin lines, modems, routers, etc for a few bucks/month. But it would make sense for WebTV to allow a local ISP to be THE provider in areas where they don't have POP's. Nope, can't be done. Apparently, they use some proprietery encryption scheme, and are making big plans for people to conduct all kinds of business solely through their ISP. Its too bad. The set-top box definitely has a niche. If they are going to succeed, they will do so in that 90% of the market they cover. In the remaining 10% they will probably never cover, what could it hurt for them to permit people to use their local ISP? I read recently in Cisco's "Internetworking Terms and Acronyms", the Internet defined as: 'The worlds largest internetwork, connecting thousands of networks worldwide and having a "culture" that focuses on simplicity, research, and standardization based on real-life use.' It will be interesting to see whether WebTV's proprietery notions about access will be accepted by such a culture. Dave Sieg dave@tricon.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Dec 96 16:46:38 EST From: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) Subject: COCOTs and 800 Numbers In TELECOM Digest dstott@juno.com (Dave J Stott) wrote: > Sometimes she forgets her change, and has to make the call another way. > If she has no change she can call 1-800-COLLECT and get through for > free, (to her, though there's a $1.80 on the next phone bill). She > can also call collect through the COCOT's AOS for up to $3.00 (she's > done that before, too). Or, she can call my personal 800 number for > free (to her) with no outrageous fee on my monthly bill. > If COCOTs can charge $.35 per call to an 800 number, she can't call home > at all if she forgets her quarter. > That's real world. We're not poor, we're not COCOT dependent, we're > not interested in market-based pricing vs government regulation. All > we care about is that my teenager can call home from where ever she > is, even if she forgets her quarter. How about some personal responsibility here. It is not any COCOT's fault that your teenager forgets her quarter. She still has the option of calling collect and if you had any smarts, you would make her pay for the collect call out of her own money. After spending $3 of her own funds a few times, I suspect she would get a lot better at having a quarter on her. Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390 levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: COCOT 800/888 Charges Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 18:45:07 -0800 I've been reading the various arguments about COCOT 800/888 charges, and there are some points I feel are being given short shrift. First and foremost, it is the COCOT owners who want to change the existing regulations, so the burden of proof is entirely theirs that the changes they wish to make are desirable from a public policy viewpoint. Some have made the absurd statement that this is a "weak argument," but it is anything but. Those who wish to change a law must always prove that the change is desirable; the only alternative is chaos. Second, we are NOT talking about deregulating payphone charges here. We are talking about CHANGING the existing regulations and imposing some new regulatory burdens on other people. One of the proposals calls for the long distance companies that carry 800/888 traffic to reimburse payphone owners for that traffic. That is not deregulation -- the FCC proposes to set the amount of reimbursement by fiat at 35 cents per call. Third, the existing payphone system before the introduction of COCOTs worked quite well. There were more usable payphones before COCOTs than there are now. Various people argued at that time that there was a public benefit to be gained by allowing third-party ownership of payphones, under certain conditions. One of those conditions was that access to 800 numbers would be free. It is those same people who are now arguing that the conditions should be altered. I personally feel that too much emphasis is being placed on allowing COCOT owners to charge more, without much talk about what benefit consumers will receive in return. There needs to be some quid pro quo, and it is conspicuously absent here. Fourth, much has been made of the competition for long distance that COCOTs face from the relatively recent introduction of pre-paid calling cards with 800 access numbers. This isn't an excuse for COCOTs to be allowed to charge for 800 numbers, but rather a reason that COCOTs should refocus on providing their long distance services at a competitive price. A very few do this -- I will pop out a few quarters from my pocket for a payphone that gives me long distance anywhere in the U.S. for 25 cents a minute before I'll shell out 50 cents a minute for a pre-paid card. However, I'll go to almost any length to avoid paying a COCOT provider $5 for the first minute and $2 each additional minute for domestic long distance. Fifth, the 35 cents per minute reimbursement that is being proposed is out of all proportion to reality. There is no local call on which a COCOT can make 35 cents of pure profit. There are currently long distance companies that will provide an 800/888 number for under 10 cents per minute. That means that the call has to last over three minutes for the long distance company to even break even with what it is charging the customer. I think a much more reasonable frame of reference for setting the reimbursement to a COCOT owner from the 800/888 number provider, is the current payments by long distance companies to the LECs. I think something more like 5 cents per call, or 3 cents per call plus 0.5 cents per minute, or 1 cent/minute flat rate, would be much more plausible. Sixth, it is necessary to consider the distortions to the overall telephone marketplace that will be introduced by the current proposals. I have a calling card with 800 number access that charges me a flat rate per minute with no initial surcharge. That possibility disappears if the LDCo has to pay 35 cents to the payphone owner when I call from a COCOT. It is also necessary for the COCOT owners who are proposing these changes to answer the question of how they propose for the accounting of this fee to be handled, and what effects the change will have on the broader marketplace. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ From: Jim St. John Subject: Your Call Could Not be Completed Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 22:54:45 -0500 Organization: Internet Indiana Reply-To: jim@su1.in.net Hoping someone can shed some light on this: With what seems like gradually increasing frequency, when dialing out from my home number I hear the 3-tone intercept signal (probably not the right term but hopefully you know what I mean) followed by the recording: "Your call could not be completed, please try your call again." I hang up, press redial, and the call goes through. As a guesstimate, I get this on maybe 20% of my outbound call attempts. To the best of my knowledge it has never ocurred on the 2nd attempt. I'm curious as to what conditions would result in this particular recording, and is it likely a switch problem or something at my end? Another rather bizarre item, on at least a handful of ocassions I have found this same recording left as a message on my answering machine (?). -jim- ------------------------------ From: hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Are Email Spams Profitable? Date: 6 Dec 1996 00:26:38 GMT Organization: Philadelphia City Paper's City Net Do the people who issue email spams make any money off of them? While they're relatively cheap to distribute, they are not free. The person has to somehow secure a list of addresses. Then they need a skilled programmer to convert that list into a mass mailing, and to forge the headings on the mailing so people can't write back and complain. I suspect the response rate is quite low. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect it is also. Have you, or anyone you know, ever responded positively (to the spammer's point of view) by ordering the product or service mentioned? Have you ever done anything except either throw it out unanswered or sent back a note asking for it to stop? I'll grant you the readers here may not be the typical or stereotypical netter personality, but I really don't think those spams get anywhere at all. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #648 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Dec 6 11:50:28 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA12147; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 11:50:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 11:50:28 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612061650.LAA12147@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #649 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Dec 96 11:50:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 649 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines (Tim Dillman) Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines (Bruce Pennypacker) Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines (Darryl Smith) Re: WebTV Sad Story (J.P. White) Re: WebTV Sad Story (Richard J. Kinch) Re: The SPAM Battles Rage On (David Wigglesworth) Re: Are Email Spams Profitable? (Eric Elder) Re: Are Email Spams Profitable? (Lou Coles) Spam, Spam, Spam (Jamie Dyer) Re: Area Code Splits - Why? (Eric Bohlman) Re: Need Advice on Voice Call/Call Transfer Service (Bob Keller) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 6 Dec 96 09:26 EST From: Tim Dillman <0006540276@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines Of all the responses I received Fred had the best information of data actually being transmitted over power lines. It uses something called X-10 ?!?! ------- FORWARD, Original message follows ------- Date: Thursday, 05-Dec-96 02:55 PM From: Fred Blonder Well, X-10 has been transmitting digital data over power lines for the last twenty years. I use it at my house. It goes at the glacial pace of 60 bits per second. (It's actually 120 bits/sec, but each bit is sent, then followed by its logical inverse for noise immunity.) This is slow enough to produce a noticeable delay in even the simple commands X-10 handles. There have been repeated joking references to running TCP/IP over power lines via this protocol, with the emphasis on "joking". One of the interesting features of X-10 protocol is that it doesn't travel through transformers. This is both a blessing and a curse. There's a whole culture surrounding this, and catalogs of tools to measure X-10 signal strength through your house and products to immunize the system from noise from, for example, your refrigerator motor. Overall I find that the system works reasonably well, but I wouldn't want to run anything critical with it. Back in 1968 I saw a similar non-digital system which sent control commands over power-lines using touch-tone signals. Bizarre as this sounds it seemed to work okay. As I recall GE manufactured the system. This was on the market, not a prototype. I'm willing to believe in ethernet-ish transmission over power lines as long as you don't need high speed or high reliability. ------------------------------ From: Bruce Pennypacker Subject: Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines Date: 6 Dec 1996 14:26:34 GMT Organization: Computer Telephony Group, Artisoft, Inc. In article telecom16.643.2@massis.lcs.mit.edu, Tim Dillman <0006540276@mcimail.com> said: > I recently visited one of my customers to discuss future technologies > and he brought up the wildest idea I have heard yet. It seems that > the public utilities are using power lines as the transmission media > for internal ethernet transmissions (or so he said). I was very > skeptical about this notion but managed a smile and nod when my > customer told me of this, but sill I wonder ... Well I can't explicitly confirm or deny that anybody is currently doing this, but I suppose the technology exists to make it possible. About 20 years ago my dad had an intercom system that used the wiring in the house to transmit audio. Today you can buy "wireless extensions" for telephones where you plug a device into an outlet and a phone jack. You then plug another device into any outlet in the house and into a telephone, and you suddenly have a new extension. So the transmission of audio data over power lines has been a reality for quite some time. I would assume that the same technology could be used to transmit digital data as well. The only problem I seem to recall is that power fluctuations (spikes, drops, etc.) and devices like electric motors, fluorscent lights, etc. could distort the audio. So I suppose these could be concerns for sending digital data as well. Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 17:52:08 +1000 From: Darryl Smith Subject: Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines > I recently visited one of my customers to discuss future technologies > and he brought up the wildest idea I have heard yet. It seems that > the public utilities are using power lines as the transmission media > for internal ethernet transmissions (or so he said). I was very > skeptical about this notion but managed a smile and nod when my > customer told me of this, but sill I wonder ... Hi there, Firstly I work for Pacific Power as an Engineer. Pacfic Power is the new name of what was the Electricity Commission of New South Wales (Australia). Pacific Power was until six months ago the only power generator in NSW until the organisation was broken into competing state owned companies. Pacific Power holds the record for the longest continuous service for a coal powered generator at over 600 days. Having said that I will get onto the topic. The answer to utilities using power lines is YES; But I will further elaborate. Here in australia they are known as Power Line Carrier (or PLC) whaich has a 40 Watt transmitter connected to 330 and 500 kVolt transmission lines through a capacitor. These transmitters are running on between 200 and 500 kHz. From memory these signals were differentially feed into two phases of the line. And for any one interested once a contractor wanted to use 455 kHz as a transmission frequency over power lines -- but we realised that was not a good move and would probably cause plane crashes (455 kHz is a common IF frequency for radios.) Anyway these channels provide about two voice channels and about ten 110bps channels (YES - TELETYPE). From memory each voice channel (or tentty channels) needed their own 40 watt transmitter. This phone system used to be self routing, so you could dial an extension once you got to the other end of the line, or dial the single digit of the next transmission line you wanted to use. One game was to see how many circles you could go through before the voice quality degraded too much. The TTY channels are used primarily for metering information and for tripping adjacent transmission lines -- although a state wide microwave network has meant that most intertriping has been removed from the power lines (How do you send a message to trip a transmission line if the transmission line you need to trip (because of a short to ground) is the same one you are sending tripping instructions on... :-) I once tried to use a modem on the PLC voice circuit -- and the best I could do was a 300 BPS modem. 1200 didn't work; nor did a trailblazer with all its signal processing. And what I needed to connect to was a PABX at the other end. For some reason the signal quality over the power lines is a bit noisy and scratchy. b) Fibre in the transmission line. This is a new one. Fibre is being put in the overhead earth wires in NSW as our 1.9 GHz microwave frequesncies are being resumed for PCS. The fibre has a 30-40 year life span - maybe. By putting it in the centre of the earth conductor there is little degredation due to high voltages (although lightning vaporising the entire conductor is another thing). Fibre has also been used to measure the temperatures of the transmission line by measureing it's characteristics with a TDR - But that is in the HIGH VOLTAGE conductor, and those fibres do not last. c) Whan I was doing my undergraduate thesis I found an article on Spread Spectrum transmission over power lines for metering in homes. There are a few IEEE articles on this. d) In power stations fibre is used to transmit signals about the control systems and local area networks. Fibre is used because a power station is one of thr worst places for power known to man. The characteristics of supply are such that the voltage can go to 75% for 5 minutes and the frequency can be a few hertz off for a similar period due to major problems. (You should be in a power station during a blackout :-) I hope that has answered all your questions -- and prompted even more. Darryl Smith ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 09:33:58 -0800 From: JP White Reply-To: ffv.aerotech@ffvaerotech.com Organization: FFV Aerotech Subject: Re: WebTV Sad Story Dave Sieg wrote (lots cut out for brevity): > I said that the 90% of the US represents about 10% of the > land area, and that the non-metro areas still make up a sizeable > number of people who will buy the box, run up huge phone bills, only > to get an extremely bad taste in their mouth for WebTV, and return the > box for a refund. > Its too bad. The set-top box definitely has a niche. If they are > going to succeed, they will do so in that 90% of the market they > cover. In the remaining 10% they will probably never cover, what > could it hurt for them to permit people to use their local ISP? I agree that the WebTV concept is a very good idea, especially for those who don't have a PC and require just Internet access only. It seems to me that WebTV could easily provide a 1-800 number for rural customers and limit their hours to say 15 hours per month, and then charge for aditional hours at $5 per hour. I'm sure WebTV could get great rates for 800 inbound with the volume they would generate. This way they wouldn't get quite so many returned units, and should make rural customers aware of this up front to avoid the feeling that they have been had. Even though 15 hours is pathetic compared to unlimited, I'm sure it would still attract business because it's still cheaper than buying a hugely negative investment such as a PC that will be virtually worthless in three to four years. So what if the set top box is usless in three to four years, you've only invested between $320 to $450 (depending on what you buy). In defense of WebTV they do provide a service where you give them your area code and first three digits of your local number and they will inform you if the call is local or not. However there is catch 22, this service is available on their Web page, so if you havn't got Web access your stuck. I doubt they will move away from the proprietry approach any time soon. What they are selling is not the set top boxes, but their web access at $19.95 a month. I expect the price of the boxes to plumet over the coming years, but the service will stay the same or get more expensive once you're hooked. It's just like selling razors cheap to sell expensive razor blades. The only competition they have for TV Web access is either the Gateway 2000 Destination system (big bucks) or the long promised Net PC that Oracle and others are talking about for $500. Not much has happened in this arena yet (but I'm sure it will, and give WebTV a run for their money). JP White Manager Information Systems FFV Aerotech Inc., Mail to : ffv.aerotech@ffvaerotech.com Web : http://www.ffvaerotech.com ------------------------------ From: kinch@netline.net (Richard J. Kinch) Subject: Re: WebTV Sad Story Date: 6 Dec 1996 03:33:51 -0500 Organization: TrueTeX Software Dave Sieg (dave@tricon.net) wrote: > It will be interesting to see whether WebTV's proprietery notions > about access will be accepted by such a culture. I just have to tell you about a WebTV unit I saw on display at Sears. I picked up the clicker thing and started playing with it, trying to bring up my web page and my photo. A salesman wandered over and began talking up the sale to me, but it was apparent that he didn't really understand what the Web was. When my photo suddenly appeared on the the screen, he was thoroughly startled and dumbfounded. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 08:34:41 EDT From: David Wigglesworth Subject: Re: The SPAM Battles Rage On In TELECOM Digest V16 #647 The Old Bear wrote: > Also, on the topic of SPAM, I received a piece of junk mail promoting > mass mailing software from a domain MAILLOOP.COM in Florida. Mail Loop Software (MAILLOOP-DOM) 1112 Weston Rd, #238 Weston, FL 33326 USA Domain Name: MAILLOOP.COM Administrative Contact, Billing Contact: Hernandez, Jorge (JH4219) jorge@MAILLOOP.COM 954-748-3912 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Gladys Crocker (GC29-ORG) gladys@NANCYNET.COM 415-440-2987 Record last updated on 26-Nov-96. Record created on 26-Nov-96. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.NANCYNET.COM 208.1.117.3 NS2.NANCYNET.COM 208.1.117.67 > checked the domain in the internic RS directory, it showed that it is > being serviced by an outfit/individual in San Francisco which operates > at least two boiler-plated servers as NANCYNET.COM and SALLYNET.COM. Domain status of NANCYNET.com Nancy's Network Name Services (NANCYNET-DOM) 2735 Greenwich St San Francisco, CA 94123 US Domain Name: NANCYNET.COM Administrative Contact: Solomon, Luke (LS1760) ceo@NANCYNET.COM 415-440-2987 Technical Contact, Zone Contact, Billing Contact: Gladys Crocker (GC29-ORG) gladys@NANCYNET.COM 415-440-2987 Record last updated on 23-Nov-96. Record created on 23-Nov-96. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.NANCYNET.COM 208.1.117.3 NS2.NANCYNET.COM 208.1.117.67 Domain status of SALLYNET.com Sally's Network Services (SALLYNET2-DOM) 2735 Greenwich St San Francisco, CA 94123 US Domain Name: SALLYNET.COM Administrative Contact, Billing Contact: Mabel Crocker (MC76-ORG) mabel@SALLYNET.COM 415-440-2987 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Gladys Crocker (GC29-ORG) gladys@NANCYNET.COM 415-440-2987 Record last updated on 26-Nov-96. Record created on 26-Nov-96. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.NANCYNET.COM 208.1.117.3 NS2.NANCYNET.COM 208.1.117.67 ------------------------------ From: Eric Elder Subject: Re: Are Email Spams Profitable? Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 08:44:02 -0800 Organization: Lucent Technologies Reply-To: eelder@mailhost.paradyne.com Lisa Hancock wrote: > The latest two spam scams I ran into are: My wife and I recently had > a little baby that is having medical problems. Can you send me . . . > The second was: I am a female college student who let a bad man take > pictures of me for money. When my parents found out they disowned > me. Can you send me . . . I will have to give these spammers credit for being imaginative. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh indeed they are very imaginative. And the problem which arises is that when there is a legitmate situation as described, of course then no one believes the writer because of all the spam and fraud which preceeded it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lou Coles Subject: Re: Are Email Spams Profitable? Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 04:41:47 -0800 Organization: ANA Lisa Hancock wrote: > Do the people who issue email spams make any money off of them? > I suspect the response rate is quite low. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect it is also. Have you, or > anyone you know, ever responded positively (to the spammer's point > of view) by ordering the product or service mentioned? Have you > ever done anything except either throw it out unanswered or sent > back a note asking for it to stop? I'll grant you the readers here > may not be the typical or stereotypical netter personality, but I > really don't think those spams get anywhere at all. PAT] Some do seem to make enough to keep it up. Often the victems pay to have the spammers advertise on the web, only to find out all they get is violent responses. Some spammers actually do quite well at hawking their spam programs. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 01:21:25 EST From: jamie@comet.net (jamie dyer) Subject: Spam, Spam, Spam Check out http://troi.iq-internet.com. At least these folks make no bones about what they are. The reply address is bad. - --- Spam text with another 800 # to inquire about services:)--- To: All@On-The-Net Subject: Control E-Mail Advertising Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com We all love or hate advertising, it just depends on if it interests us ... Advertisers want to send YOU E-Mail ... BUT, will it interest you??? Reply to this message with the names of your favorite magazines to receive messages from firms who would advertise in those publications. Reply to this message with NO MAIL to prevent ANY commercial E-Mail from C.A.R.E. member firms. Thank You, The Red Pages and C.A.R.E. ( 1-800-257-7831 ) "Concientious Advertising thru Responsible E-Mail" - ---end Spam------------------------------------------------- jamie dyer Send empty message to jamie@comet.net | Comet.Net | pgpkey@comet.net | Charlottesville, Va. | for pgp public key. | (804)295-2407 | | http://www.comet.net | ------------------------------ From: ebohlman@netcom.com (Eric Bohlman) Subject: Re: Area Code Splits - Why? Organization: OMS Development Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 19:06:13 GMT Robert McMillin (rlm@netcom.com) wrote: > Do you mean to force people to buy $100-200 worth of hardware if they > want additional phone lines? How would the lines be delivered? > Doesn't analog DID require a trunk bundle to be hauled to the > customer? Who and in what manner is this to be paid for? Assuming that the customer just needs several separate *numbers* (rather than the ability to handle several *calls* at the same time), $100-$200 would be less than the yearly cost of five or more lines. I'm pretty sure that the protocol that's used to deliver Caller ID information from the CO to the subscriber can be extended to handle delivery of the number actually dialed (IIRC, there's a "type" field for which CID is just one option). I actually have a mini-version of this on my office line. I have three numbers with distinctive ring patterns all coming into the same line. One of them is my regular business number, one is my fax number (my fax traffic is too low to justify having a separate line) and one is pointed to by my 800 number (so when I get a voice call I can tell if I'm paying for it). I use a $60 "Ring Decipher" box to split the fax number from the voice numbers. Another thing that could relieve number congestion: a lot of residential customers get a line solely for modem use, and it's almost always used purely for outgoing calls. Why should such a line need a number at all? Why can't the LECs offer an "anonymous" outgoing-only line? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 09:13:02 -0500 From: Bob Keller Subject: Re: Need Advice on Voice Call/Call Transfer Service In TELECOM Digest Vol 16, Issue 646, Barry Megdal wrote: > I am involved with a business that is run out of two locations (two > home offices). * * * > Specifically, here is what I want: The phone is answered with "Thank > you for calling XYZ Co. Press 1 to speak with Jim, and 2 to speak > with Frank". The appropriate phone would then ring. If the phone is > busy, I would like them to get voicemail for that individual. > We have Pacific Bell service, so I thought their voicemail would be a > natural choice. But it seems they can't do what I want. I bet they could do it if you had three telephone numbers. You would set up the first number to be the main number given out to the public to call. It would say Press 1 for Jim or 2 for Frank, and the calls would be forwarded accordingly. Then, you set individually set up the two direct lines for Jim and Frank to roll to voice mail on busy/no-answer. They *should* be able to set this up, insofar as the three lines are independent, i.e., all you are asking them to do on the first line is to allow the caller to select 1 or 2 and to forward the call accordingly. As to the other two lines, you will only be asking them to set up a busy/no-answer transfer -- either to the LEC-provided voice mail or to a number designated by you if you want to use a third-party voice mail. At this point you would have a number of options, e.g., you could just have a separate voice mail service on each of the two lines, or you could arrange for both Jim's and Frank's lines to roll to the same voice mail but one having two mailboxes ... one for Jim and one for Frank. This way the caller would not get to the mailbox until the call encountered either a legitimate busy signal or a no-answer. You could also arrange for voice mail with a third-party provider. You could also set this one up so that Jim and Frank have similar phone numbers, e.g., the main number could be NXX-nn00 while Jim and Frank could be NXX-nn01 and NXX-nn02, respectively. That way you could look like a "real" business and give out "direct" numbers to selected customers, knowing they would still roll to voice mail if there was no connect. By adding call transfer and three-way calling features, Jim could even transfer calls to Frank and vice versa. All of the above is assuming three lines and standard features. I am fairly certain, however, that at least here in Bell Atlantic country, there is an enhanced version of Centrex service that includes off premises extensions that would probably accomplish what you want. Of course, you may be trying to get away with residential rates, but if you are using business lines then Centrex is usually less expensive (again, I am speaking only from my knowledge of Bell Atlantic offerings) in the long run because many of the added features (call forwarding, no answer transfer, conference calling, etc.) are included in the price. It's probably worth your asking. I'm in a similar situation, namely, I am a one-person business and I do my work from various locations (a downtown office as well as two home offices in two different parts of the state). I don't have the press 1 or 2 problem, insofar as it is just me ... but I do have the problem that *I* don't even know where I'll be at any given moment, so I certainly can't expect my clients to know! . My solution is to have all of my lines (one bus, one fax, two cellular, and two home office lines) roll to the same voice mail with pager notify. This plus a combination of call forwarding features allows me to answer most calls, and when I don't, I am paged right away. It works great for me. And it is a tad expensive, but still a whole lot cheaper than a full-time receptionist or a live answering service. The point, however, is that if I had asked the telco if I could accomplish what I am now doing, they probably would have said no. The telco has a lot of offerings for "small business", but what they consider "small" is pretty darned big (and too expensive) by my standards. I have often found that rather than asking "Can you do this?" (which, to be fair, often does work with Bell Atlantic), I instead have to get the low down on what the various pieces and options they *can* do and then figure out how to put the pieces together for myself. Good luck! Bob Keller (KY3R) Law Office of Robert J. Keller, P.C. rjk@telcomlaw.com 2000 L St NW, Ste 200, Wash DC 20036 www.his.com/~rjk Tel: 202-416-1670 Fax: 301-229-6875 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #649 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Dec 6 12:22:05 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA15407; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 12:22:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 12:22:05 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612061722.MAA15407@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #650 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Dec 96 12:22:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 650 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Universal Service (Red Rock via Monty Solomon) Re: Your Call Could Not be Completed (Terry Kennedy) Re: Your Call Could Not be Completed (Phil Ritter) Re: Area Code Woes (Joel Upchurch) Re: Area Code Woes (John R. Levine) Re: Area Code Woes (Art Kamlet) The Problem With Pay Phone Deregulation (John R. Levine) Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines (Robert Foxworth) Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines (Bill Jenney) 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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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, 6 Dec 1996 03:06:33 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Universal Service Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:47:12 -0800 (PST) From: Phil Agre Subject: FCC universal service =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help@weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 1919 M St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 [DA 96 1891] Released November 18, 1996 COMMON CARRIER BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON UNIVERSAL SERVICE RECOMMENDED DECISION CC DOCKET 96-45 Comment Date: December 16, 1996 Reply Comment Date: January 10, 1997 On November 7, 1996, the Federal-State Joint Board adopted a Recommended Decision, as required by Section 254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("1996 Act"), regarding universal service. In the decision, the Joint Board made numerous recommendations on universal service issues including, for example, issues relating to: universal service principles; services eligible for support; support mechanisms for rural, insular, and high cost areas; support for low income consumers; affordability; support for schools, libraries, and health care providers; administration of support mechanisms; and common line cost recovery. In addition, the Joint Board recommended that the Commission specifically seek additional information and comment on a number of topics including, for example: 1. Principles. How should the additional principle of competitive neutrality be defined and applied within the context of universal service? 2. Low-Income. What baseline amount of support should be provided to low-income consumers? Is the $5.25 baseline amount suggested in the Recommended Decision likely to be adequate? How can the FCC avoid the unintended consequence that the increased federal support amount has no direct effect on Lifeline subscribers' rates in many populous states with Lifeline programs, and instead results only in a larger percentage of total support being generated from federal sources? 3. Schools/Libraries. What methods should the Commission use for identifying high cost areas for purposes of providing a greater discount to schools and libraries located in high cost areas? What measures of economic advantage may be readily available to identify economically disadvantaged non-public schools and economically disadvantaged libraries or, if none is readily available, what information could be required that would be minimally burdensome? 4. Health Care. What is the exact scope of services that should be included in the list of additional services "necessary for the provision of health care" in a state? In responding, commenters should address the telecommunications needs of rural health care providers and the most cost-effective ways to provide these services to rural areas. What would be the relative costs and benefits of supporting technologies and services that require bandwidth higher than 1.544 Mbps? How rapidly is local access to Internet Service Providers (ISPs) expanding in rural areas of the country, and what are the costs likely to be incurred in providing toll-free access to ISPs for health care providers in rural areas? What are the probable costs that would be incurred in eliminating distance-based charges and/or charges on traffic between Local Access and Transport Areas (LATAs) (interLATA traffic), where such charges are in excess of those paid by customers in the nearest urban areas of the state? Do insular areas experience a disparity in telecommunications rates between urbanized and non- urbanized areas? Commenters should supply information on the size of cities and other demographic information pertaining to insular areas that might be used to establish the urban rate and rural rate in each of those areas. What costs would be incurred in supporting upgrades to the public switched network necessary to provide services to rural health care providers? To what extent, and on what schedule, might ongoing network modernization, as is currently going forward under private initiative or according to state-sponsored modernization plans, make universal service support for such upgrades unnecessary? What are the probable costs, and the advantages and disadvantages, of supporting upgrades to public switched or backbone networks where such upgrades can be shown to be necessary to deliver eligible services to rural health care providers? 5. Administration. Should contributions for high cost and low-income support mechanisms be based on the intrastate and interstate revenues of carriers that provide interstate telecommunications services, based on the factors enumerated in the Recommended Decision? Should the intrastate nature of the services supported by the high cost and low-income programs have a bearing on the revenue base for assessing funds? Should contributing carriers' abilities to identify separately intrastate and interstate revenues in an evolving telecommunications market and carriers' incentives to shift revenues between jurisdictions to avoid contributions have a bearing on this question? We ask parties to address the effects that the Joint Board's recommendations to the Commission are likely to have on small entities and what measures the Commission should undertake to avoid significant economic impact on small business entities as defined by Section 601(3) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same filing deadlines as comments on the rest of the Recommended Decision, but they must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to the regulatory flexibility analysis. The Commission invites interested parties to file comments on the Joint Board's recommendations and on the Commission's legal authority to implement such recommendations. Copies of the Recommended Decision can be obtained from (1) the International Transcription Service (ITS), Room 140, 2100 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037 or (2) the FCC World Wide Web Home Page: http://www.fcc.gov. Comments should be filed on or before December 16, 1996 and Reply Comments on or before January 10, 1997. Interested parties must file an original and four copies of their comments with the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Room 222, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments should reference CC Docket No. 96-45. Parties should send one copy of their comments to the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service, Room 140, 2100 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037. Parties must also serve copies of their comments on the individuals identified in the attached service list. After filing, comments will be available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554 Parties are also asked to submit comments on diskette. Diskette submissions would be in addition to and not a substitute for the formal filing requirements addressed above. Parties submitting diskettes should submit them to Sheryl Todd, Common Carrier Bureau, 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8611, Washington, D.C. 20554. Such a submission should be on a 3.5 inch diskette in an IBM compatible format using WordPerfect 5.1 for Windows software in a "read only" mode. The diskette should be clearly labelled with the party's name, proceeding, and date of submission. The diskette should be accompanied by a cover letter. ---FCC--- Service List The Honorable Reed E. Hundt, Chairman Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 814 Washington, D.C. 20554 The Honorable Rachelle B. Chong, Commissioner Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 844 Washington, D.C. 20554 The Honorable Susan Ness, Commissioner Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 832 Washington, D.C. 20554 The Honorable Julia Johnson, Commissioner Florida Public Service Commission 2540 Shumard Oak Blvd. Gerald Gunter Building Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850 The Honorable Kenneth McClure, Commissioner Missouri Public Service Commission 301 W. High Street, Suite 530 Jefferson City, MO 65101 The Honorable Sharon L. Nelson, Chairman Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission P.O. Box 47250 Olympia, WA 98504-7250 The Honorable Laska Schoenfelder, Commissioner South Dakota Public Utilities Commission State Capitol, 500 E. Capitol Street Pierre, SD 57501-5070 Martha S. Hogerty Public Counsel for the State of Missouri P.O. Box 7800 Jefferson City, MO 65102 Paul E. Pederson, State Staff Chair Missouri Public Service Commission P.O. Box 360 Jefferson City, MO 65102 Lisa Boehley Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8605 Washington, D.C. 20554 Charles Bolle South Dakota Public Utilities Commission State Capitol, 500 E. Capitol Street Pierre, SD 57501-5070 Deonne Bruning Nebraska Public Service Commission 300 The Atrium 1200 N Street, P.O. Box 94927 Lincoln, NE 68509-4927 James Casserly Federal Communications Commission Office of Commissioner Ness 1919 M Street, Room 832 Washington, D.C. 20554 John Clark Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8619 Washington, D.C. 20554 Bryan Clopton Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8615 Washington, D.C. 20554 Irene Flannery Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8922 Washington, D.C. 20554 Daniel Gonzalez Federal Communications Commission Office of Commissioner Chong 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 844 Washington, D.C. 20554 Emily Hoffnar Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8623 Washington, D.C. 20554 L. Charles Keller Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8918 Washington, D.C. 20554 Lori Kenyon Alaska Public Utilities Commission 1016 West Sixth Avenue, Suite 400 Anchorage, AK 99501 David Krech Federal Communications Commission 2025 M Street, N.W., Room 7130 Washington, D.C. 20554 Debra M. Kriete Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission P.O. Box 3265 Harrisburg, PA 17105-3265 Diane Law Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8920 Washington, D.C. 20554 Mark Long Florida Public Service Commission 2540 Shumard Oak Blvd. Gerald Gunter Building Tallahassee, FL 32399 Robert Loube Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8914 Washington, D.C. 20554 Samuel Loudenslager Arkansas Public Service Commission P.O. Box 400 Little Rock, AR 72203-0400 Sandra Makeeff Iowa Utilities Board Lucas State Office Building Des Moines, IA 50319 Philip F. McClelland Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate 1425 Strawberry Square Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Michael A. McRae D.C. Office of the People's Counsel 1133 15th Street, N.W. -- Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tejal Mehta Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8625 Washington, D.C. 20554 Terry Monroe New York Public Service Commission 3 Empire Plaza Albany, NY 12223 John Morabito Deputy Division Chief, Accounting and Audits Federal Communications Commission 2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 812 Washington, D.C. 20554 Mark Nadel Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8916 Washington, D.C. 20554 John Nakahata Federal Communications Commission Office of the Chairman 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 814 Lee Palagyi Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission 1300 South Evergreen Park Drive S.W. Olympia, WA 98504 Kimberly Parker Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8609 Washington, D.C. 20554 Barry Payne Indiana Office of the Consumer Counsel 100 North Senate Avenue, Room N501 Indianapolis, IN 46204-2208 Jeanine Poltronieri Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8924 Washington, D.C. 20554 James Bradford Ramsay National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners P.O. Box 684 Washington, D.C. 20044-0684 Brian Roberts California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Gary Seigel Federal Communications Commission 2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 812 Washington, D.C. 20554 Richard Smith Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8605 Washington, D.C. 20554 Pamela Szymczak Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8912 Washington, D.C. 20554 Lori Wright Federal Communications Commission 2100 M Street, N.W., Room 8603 Washington, D.C. 20554 ------------------------------ From: Terry Kennedy Subject: Re: Your Call Could Not be Completed Organization: St. Peter's College, US Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 12:02:49 GMT Jim St. John writes: > With what seems like gradually increasing frequency, when dialing out > from my home number I hear the 3-tone intercept signal (probably not > the right term but hopefully you know what I mean) followed by the > recording: "Your call could not be completed, please try your call > again." I hang up, press redial, and the call goes through. "SIT", but we knew what you meant 8-) > As a guesstimate, I get this on maybe 20% of my outbound call attempts. > To the best of my knowledge it has never ocurred on the 2nd attempt. Do you get any digits/letters on the end, like "201 4T"? > I'm curious as to what conditions would result in this particular > recording, and is it likely a switch problem or something at my end? There are actually three similar messages (which some switches may not distinguish between): 1) you didn't dial enough digits for the switch to route your call (often "Your call did not go through") 2) the switch knows how to route your call, but "can't get there from here" (often "All circuits are busy") 3) you dialed a sufficent number of digits but they didn't make sense as a number or area code and number (unassigned area code or unass- igned prefix within the area code) (often "Your call could not be completed as dialed") If you get the message after a pause, it's probably the first one. If you get it right away, it's one of the latter 2. Since you say it's a frequent problem, I doubt it's #2 - those problems tend to get fixed rapidly. Could your phone dial be going bad? If you have a modem, do you ever get these with the modem, or just from the phone? Likewise, if you have more than one phone, does it only happen on one instrument? > Another rather bizarre item, on at least a handful of ocassions I have > found this same recording left as a message on my answering machine (?). This is definitely #1. Someone called and hung up while your machine was playing the outgoing message (and your machine doesn't understand CPC or is set wrong [CPC is how the phone switch tells customer equipment that a disconnect happened]). So your machine is getting dial tone, and when the CO sees it didn't dial anything, the CO plays the "call didn't go through" message (and after that the bleep-bleep "your phone is off the hook" noise comes through). Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.spc.edu St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA +1 201 915 9381 (voice) +1 201 435-3662 (FAX) ------------------------------ From: Phil Ritter/Los Angeles/AirTouch Date: 6 Dec 96 7:56:33 Subject: Re: Your Call Could Not be Completed In TELECOM Digest V16 #648, Jim St. John writes: > With what seems like gradually increasing frequency, when dialing out > from my home number I hear the 3-tone intercept signal (probably not > the right term but hopefully you know what I mean) followed by the > recording: "Your call could not be completed, please try your call > again." I hang up, press redial, and the call goes through. > As a guesstimate, I get this on maybe 20% of my outbound call attempts. > To the best of my knowledge it has never ocurred on the 2nd attempt. > I'm curious as to what conditions would result in this particular > recording, and is it likely a switch problem or something at my end? > Another rather bizarre item, on at least a handful of ocassions I have > found this same recording left as a message on my answering machine (?). This recording is often used instead of fast-busy for "all trunks busy" conditions (or certain other switch resources, but they almost never run out of those). I'm willing to bet that if you complain, your LEC will tell you about all those resource hogging Internet users:-). A more likely cause is that they "downsized" their best traffic engineers and probably don't even have a clue that there is a problem. Phil ------------------------------ From: Joel Upchurch Subject: Re: Area Code Woes Date: Thu, 05 Dec 1996 22:32:01 -0500 Reply-To: upchurch@bellsouth.net Lisa Hancock wrote: > People are very sensitive about the zip code they live in many places, > and the post office is hit with many requests to split off zip codes > if one community is combined with an undesirable one. > I can go on and on. Let's just say that one's address, including area > code and phone number, are an important status symbol to a lot of > people. It probably isn't just a status symbol. I just got Street Atlas 4.0 and it has all sorts of demographic information organized by zip code. I suspect that there may be real world financial consequences, such as loan elgibility or insurance rates that could be effected by living in an 'undesirable' zip code. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Dec 96 00:01 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Area Code Woes Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Okay, this is obviously happening all over the US, but why not just > increase the telephone numbers from seven digits to eight? This suggestion comes up from time to time. It's impractical -- North America uses a different signalling system from the rest of the world (or it'd be more accurate to say that the rest of the world uses a different system than we do, since we started first) and the 3+3+4 format of phone numbers is built into literally millions of pieces of equipment ranging from central offices to PBXes to memory telephones. We'll eventually have to go to longer numbers in the mid-21st century, but it's not going to be pretty, and we'll need all the time we can get to prepare. > I have seen no sane reasons for cellular phone numbers to be included > in geographical area codes, since they are not relevant to geography, > whereas home and business phone numbers are ways to contact a phone in > a particular geographical location. Well, yes and no. In the U.S. we have a balkanized cellular system, with the country broken up into small service areas. My cell phone has an Ithaca N.Y. phone number because in fact it spends most of its time in Ithaca and it's served by one of the Ithaca cellular systems. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof ------------------------------ From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet) Subject: Re: Area Code Woes Date: 6 Dec 1996 01:28:44 -0500 Organization: InfiNet Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com In article , Lisa Hancock wrote: > People are very sensitive about the zip code they live in many places, And there are quite practical effects if a zip code split. Examples: Auto and property insurance companies often charge lower premiums to nice desirable zip code than to undesirable one. Junk mail marketers may mail to only good or only bad zip codes, based on demographics of that zip code. Etc. So far, this is not true, to my knowledge, for NPA-NXX. Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio kamlet@infinet.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Dec 96 00:11 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: The Problem With Pay Phone Deregulation Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. I see one fairly compelling argument in favor of continuing regulation of pay phones: it can never be a free market for pay phone users. Why? Because the users have no say in the selection of a pay phone vendor. The owner of the location selects the phone, and his interests are almost completely opposite those of the phone users -- the location owner wants the largest revenue he can get, which translates to the highest possible prices, and nonsense like $10 AOS collect calls and now 35 cent charges for calls to 800 numbers. Yes, in theory, people might say "I'll never come back to your restaurant until you put in a better payphone", but in most cases the phone isn't central either to the location owner or the customer and it ends up being one more irritation that's not quite worth making a stink about. In a truly competitive market, any pay phone vendor would be able to install a phone anywhere a competitor did, but that's utterly impractical in most locations, so we have to choose between rip-offs and regulation. It's not altogether unlike the spiral of medical costs, caused largely because there are three parties, doctor, patient, and insurance, and for the most part the party that pays the bills hasn't been involved in the decisions about what procedures to buy. Incidentally, to whoever was complaining about prepaid phone cards replacing coin-paid pay phone calls: in case you haven't noticed, phone cards are really expensive, usually 30 to 50 cents/minute. Around here there's a fair number of phones that offer local calls at 25 cents/5 mins and long distance at 25 cents/min, both of which are considerably cheaper than phone cards. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 12:53:19 -0500 From: Robert Foxworth Organization: DSN Technology Inc. Subject: Re: Ethernet over Power Lines Tim Dillman wrote on 12/05 regarding "ethernet over power lines". What I do know is that power utilities send some sort of supervisory data over power lines at around 150 to 160 kiloHertz. It can be heard, using a receiver such as a Realistic DX-390 which tunes that low. It sounds like random bursts of data at perhaps 1200 or 2400 bps, lasting a few hundred ms, at a rate of a few bursts each minute. I never tried to decode it, mainly because I never heard it very strongly, and obviously it is intended to conduct and not radiate. It is hardly *ethernet*, though. ------------------------------ From: jenney@niktow.canisius.edu (Bill Jenney) Subject: Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines Date: 6 Dec 1996 05:37:19 GMT Organization: Canisius College, Buffalo, NY 14208 Tim Dillman (0006540276@mcimail.com) wrote: > the public utilities are using power lines as the transmission media > for internal ethernet transmissions (or so he said). I was very Power Line Carrier (3rd or 4th kind of PLC) systems have been very popular for sending control tones to remote equipment for decades. BUT none are anywhere near as fast as the slowest Ethernet in town. Some utilities have built their AMR-->Automatic Meter Reading systems on PLC, only to find that future customers are located all over the Continent once deregulation hits ... so some utilities are gonna have to learn telephony, or die. Some will do both ;-( bill j ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #650 ******************************