From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 24 02:57:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA11639; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 02:57:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 02:57:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199704240657.CAA11639@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #101 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Apr 97 02:56:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 101 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson US West Fighting Flood (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Spanish Telco Blocks Call Back (John Hewitt) Book Review: "The Ultimate Web Developer's Sourcebook" (Rob Slade) Book Review: "Corporate Politics and the Internet" by Gaskin (Rob Slade) 904 Relief Plans (Bryan Bethea) UCLA Short Course: Cost Estimation & Economic Evaluation of Projects (BG) UCLA Short Course: "Automatic Speech Recognition" (Bill Goodin) Listing of 976 'Look Alikes' (NetNut!) Record Number of SUPERCOMM Exhibitors Expected in New Orleans (T. Bresien) Where Are the Numbers? (Bob Savery) How Do They Do It? (Hillary Gorman) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: US West Fighting Flood Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 11:04:46 CDT From: sewilco@fieldday.mn.org (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Among the reports in the Minnesota media about the "500-year" flood on the Red River of the North have been mention of the US West communication center in Grand Forks, North Dakota. About three-quarters of Grand Forks is flooded, with all utilities turned off. Several blocks from dry ground, a communication center which services the entire area is surrounded by sandbags and still functioning. Media reports have not given many details other than that pumps and electrical generators are being kept busy. Although most flooded homes don't need phone service, this center is servicing a large unflooded area and the overloaded cellular phone system. WCCO-TV took a minute on the 10 PM news on Tuesday night to show (from their helicopter's visual and infrared cameras) the center's island of lights in the middle of dark flooded buildings. Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org Laws are society's common sense, written down for the stupid. The stupid refuse to read. Their lawyers read to them. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One really heroic effort in Grand Forks is being made by the local newspaper which was (1) flooded out like everyone else in town and then over last weekend (2) burned out in the fire which went out of control in the downtown area. They have not missed a single issue of publication, and on Monday of this week came out with an edition headlined, "Through Hell and High Water" with a photo of the burned and gutted out downtown area under several feet of water besides. Everytime there is a tragedy somewhere in the USA we look at it and say how horrible it is and things cannot get any worse; i.e. the terrible situation in California last year with fires and floods, etc. Then when we think we have seen it all, we see still more. Seeing how helpless the firemen were in Grand Forks last weekend reminds me of the unbelievable snow blizzard experienced in Chicago in 1967, the year of the two-day snow storm which dropped about 30 inches of snow on us. The worst night of the blizzard, when none of the streets had yet been plowed, a highrise apartment building in the Rogers Park neighborhood caught fire. Firemen got to about one block away and got stalled in snow drifts. Dragging their hoses and tools, etc the last block took them another 15-20 minutes on foot; meanwhile the fire got worse and the entire ten story building burned down. At the time we said how terrible it was; tragedies come, and tragedies go, but this latest mess in Grand Forks takes the prize. I guess the folks in Manitoba are none to happy either as they watch the water coming their way over the next few days as things thaw out up there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jhewitt@ctv.es (John Hewitt) Subject: Spanish Telco Blocks Call Back Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 16:17:51 GMT Organization: Unisource Espana NEWS SERVER The Spanish State has the outmoded attitude of the telephone company being a social institution which should provide employment - not neccesarily service. Telefonica, like most European state Telcos, considers that telephone users are ripe for plucking, especially anyone who can 'afford' to call internationally. International call costs from Spain are typically twice that of the UK and N America. For this reason, Call Back services are very popular with ex-expatriates in Spain. They tend to call 'home' often and that means an international call, So expatriates use Call Back services (almost exclusively from the US) to lower internatioanl calling costs. Telefonica doesn't like this, they are losing revenue (and kinda forget the international revenue equlaization payments from the US). As a result, a game has developed between Call Back users and the Telco. You subscribe to a Call Back service and Telefonica 'watches for you at the CO. The CPU trolls the numbers called and looks for, I suppose, non-revenue calls. Too many uncompleted calls to the US, and bingo, you no longer have Call Back service. So, you ask your Call Back service provider for another number, the CPU starts watching again, and the game is on. Now there's a new slant to the game. Telefonica seems to have tired of denying access to individual numbers and has gone the whole hog. They appear to have withheld access to the entire area code used by Call Back providers. Now that ain't fair, it's not playing the game. Isn't there an international convention / agreement regarding open access to all telephone numbers through the ITU? Doesn't this amount to censorship? For example. Can ATT (or MCI, or whoever) block a US callers access to the entire Madrid area? Or, BT (or Marcury) block a UK callers access to metro Washington DC.? That's what appears to be happening in Spain. John Hewitt, Malaga Spain jhewitt@ctv.es ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 11:20:05 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Ultimate Web Developer's Sourcebook" by Sawyer BKWBDVSR.RVW 961218 "The Ultimate Web Developer's Sourcebook", Ben Sawyer, 1996, 1-57610-000-6, U$49.99/C$69.99 %A Ben Sawyer bensawyer@worldnet.att.net %C 7339 East Acoma Drive, #7, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 %D 1996 %G 1-57610-000-6 %I Coriolis %O U$49.99/C$69.99 800-410-0192 +1-602-483-0192 fax: +1-602-483-0193 %P 704 %T "The Ultimate Web Developer's Sourcebook" The real value in this book is contained in the contacts. Graphics tools, sound applications, video programs, multimedia packages, Web servers, CGI (Common Gateway Interface) tools, books, magazines, companies, and groups: this lists, overviews, and contact information goes on for chapters. The listings do tend to be more exhaustive than analytical, but you are almost bound to find some tool or resource that you are looking for *somewhere* in these pages. As for the rest, Sawyer tries to provide the concepts that professional developers will need on a daily basis. This is probably too ambitious a task: the operative word seems to be "tries". There are some very good ideas in the design of the book: one chapter concentrates on the various emerging technologies on the Web, relating each to "what this means for developers". Unfortunately, most of the advice is of the "wait and see what develops" form. Look at it as a phone book, rather than a tutorial, and you'll be happy. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKWBDVSR.RVW 961218 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 11:00:55 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Corporate Politics and the Internet" by James Gaskin BKCRPLIN.RVW 961205 "Corporate Politics and the Internet", James E. Gaskin, 1997, 0-13-651803-6, U$24.95/C$34.95 %A James E. Gaskin james@gaskin.com %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1997 %G 0-13-651803-6 %I Prentice Hall %O U$24.95/C$34.95 +1-201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131 beth_hespe@prenhall.com %P 452 %T "Corporate Politics and the Internet" Yes! Finally a book that speaks with forked tongue! Gaskin knows both the technology and the culture of the net. He also knows the corporate mindset (and who should know better than Konsultant Karl?) and politics. He can speak to both groups, and he can speak the truth. This work provides a realistic, complete, and thorough overview of the concerns of the corporate world as it approaches the net, and the net as the corporations close in. It is informed, thoughtful, and practical, allowing geeks to speak to upper management and executives to understand why you can't spam. And, since it's from Gaskin, it's readable by anybody. The primary purpose of the book is to ease the problems a company faces in getting on to the Internet, and providing net access for employees. However, Gaskin interprets this mandate quite broadly. As he should. The result is a very useful guide that provides help for the problems you can foresee--and warning of those you never knew existed. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKCRPLIN.RVW 961205 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse Please note the Peterson story - http://www.netmind.com/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ From: I5050205@aol.com (Bryan Bethea) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 02:02:38 EDT Subject: 904 Relief Plans The Florida Public Service Commission has reversed its earlier decision and will move the Pensacola, Panama City, and Tallahassee LATAs into a new NPA. Permissive dialing is slated to begin June 30, 1997 and end June 30, 1998. The Jacksonville and Daytona Beach LATAs will remain in the 904 NPA. The move surprised many including BellSouth who had expected the PSC to uphold its decision to move Jacksonville into the 234 NPA and Daytona Beach into the 386 NPA. Objections from the public as well as from the NANC, Bellcore, and the FCC may have changed the minds of some of the Commissioners. Based on current information (97-04-01), below are listed the exchanges that will move to the new NPA (850??): 209 216 219 222 224 227 229 230 231 240 243 244 245 256 263 265 267 271 283 286 293 297 298 301 302 309 310 314 315 318 327 335 342 349 352 369 379 383 385 386 402 408 410 412 413 414 415 416 421 422 425 429 430 432 433 434 435 436 438 442 444 449 450 452 453 455 456 457 458 469 470 474 475 476 477 478 479 484 487 488 490 492 494 501 505 506 507 508 509 510 513 514 516 522 524 526 531 534 535 536 537 539 544 545 547 548 551 552 553 556 560 561 562 566 568 569 570 572 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 584 585 587 592 593 594 599 601 609 622 623 626 627 638 639 643 644 647 648 650 651 652 653 654 656 657 663 664 668 670 671 674 675 678 681 682 683 689 697 712 715 718 722 729 747 762 763 769 770 773 784 785 802 803 814 819 827 830 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 841 843 849 853 856 857 859 862 863 864 865 866 870 871 872 873 874 875 877 878 881 882 883 884 885 887 891 892 893 894 896 897 899 906 913 914 915 916 921 922 925 926 927 929 932 933 934 936 937 939 941 942 944 948 951 956 957 960 962 968 969 971 973 974 980 982 983 984 986 994 995 997 (265 NXX codes) This is a much more balanced split than most recent splits that have been announced. The ratio of exchanges remaining to exchanges leaving is 55% : 45%. The shrunken 904 NPA is expected to exhaust before 2002 while the newly created NPA will exhaust near 2004. Bryan Bethea Market Designation Team Leader Touch 1 Communications ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: Cost Estimation & Economic Evaluation of Projects Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 11:21:00 -0700 On July 14-17, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Cost Estimation and Economic Evaluation of Projects", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructor is Donald S. Remer, PhD, Oliver C. Field Professor of Engineering, Harvey Mudd College of Engineering and Science. Rapidly advancing technology, increasing project complexity, and competitive pressures demand better cost estimation and economic evaluation of projects, processes, products, or services, whether developing new ones or improving existing ones. Successful engineers, scientists, and managers must use modern cost estimating and economic evaluation techniques to select the optimum mix of projects for today's cost-conscious environment. Accurate project cost estimates and investment evaluations are critical to staying competitive and optimizing organizational resources. This course develops the skills needed to prepare, review, approve, supervise, monitor, and/or use cost estimates and economic evaluations in research, development, design, manufacturing, marketing, and management. The course also discusses how to produce accurate cost estimates and investment evaluations to avoid large cost overruns or unsatisfactory investment returns, whether the project budget is a few thousand dollars or millions of dollars. The course fee is $1295, which includes extensive course materials. Course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional 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: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: Automatic Speech Recognition Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 12:04:00 -0700 On July 21-23, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Automatic Speech Recognition: Fundamentals and Applications", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Abeer Alwan, PhD, Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA, and Ananth Sankar, PhD, Senior Research Engineer, SRI International. Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) has emerged as a promising area for applications such as telephone voice dialing, database access, human-computer interactions and hands-free applications such as car phones. Since speech is the most direct form of human communication, ASR can enhance the ease, speed, and effectiveness with which humans can direct machines to accomplish desired tasks. Speech recognition has become an established research area and current understanding has already produced several fielded applications. This course is intended to provide an understanding of the basic concepts of speech recognition including speech signal processing and feature extraction, and statistical pattern recognition and its applications in speech recognition. The course also covers recent developments in special problem areas such as the recognition of noisy speech or accented speech. The instructors assume basic knowledge of signal processing and statistical analysis, and the lectures are designed to prepare participants for development work in speech recognition. The course should also offer enough background in speech recognition theory to foster the successful development of applications, and to expose new solutions to specific problems in speech recognition. The course fee is $1195, which includes extensive course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional 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: netnut@loyolanet.campus.mci.net (NetNut!) Subject: Listing of 976 'Look Alikes' Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 16:40:49 GMT Organization: CampusMCI Reply-To: netnut@loyolanet.campus.mci.net Hello all -- Got this off a website which specializes in colleges and universities (www.acuta.org) 976 look-alikes MCI has identified a list of numbers that you may want to block. Increased demand for pay-per-call services has exceeded the capacity of "976" exchanges in many metropolitan areas. In response, local telcos have designated additional exchanges as "976 look-alikes." You should consider blocking calls to these numbers as well as to 900 numbers to avoid being billed when students or others knowingly or innocently connect to these services. While this is NOT a comprehensive list, we hope this will help reduce the volume of this type of fraud. Arizona (602) 676-xxxx (602) 960-xxxx Colorado (719) 898-XXXX (303)-960-XXXX Idaho (208) 960-XXXX Louisiana (504) 636-XXXX Maine (207) 940-XXXX (207) 940-XXXX Maryland (301) 915-XXXX (410) 915-XXXX Massachusetts (508) 940-XXXX (607) 940-XXXX (607) 555-XXXX Minnesota (507) 960-XXXX Nebraska (308) 960-XXXX (402) 960-XXXX New Hampshire (603) 940-XXXX New Mexico (505) 960-XXXX New York (212) 394-XXXX (212) 540-XXXX (212) 550-XXXX (212) 970-XXXX (315) 540-XXXX (315) 550-XXXX (315) 970-XXXX (516) 540-XXXX (516) 550-XXXX (518) 540-XXXX (518) 550-XXXX (518) 970-XXXX (607) 540-XXXX (607) 550-XXXX (607) 970-XXXX (716) 540-XXXX (716) 550-XXXX (716) 970-XXXX (718) 540-XXXX (718) 550-XXXX (718) 970-XXXX (914) 540-XXXX (914) 550-XXXX (914) 970-XXXX Ohio (216) 931-XXXX (513) 499-XXXX Pennsylvania (215) 556-XXXX (412) 556-XXXX Rhode Island (401) 940-XXXX South Dakota (605) 960-XXXX Texas (512) 766-XXXX (817) 892-XXXX Utah (801) 960-XXXX Washington D.C. (202) 915-XXXX Washington State (206) 960-XXXX Wyoming (307) 960-XXXX Does anyone know where I can get a comprehensive listing of 976 like numbers? I tried searching in Lycos and Yahoo but the only thing that came up was (predictably) were porno information and Cub Scout Troop 976! Thanks! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for going to all the trouble, but it may not be a big issue. Typically 976 and related prefixes are blocked from outside the LATA where they are located, mainly because there is no mechanism in place to bill for them. Believe it or not, often times the pressure to block 976 from outside the LATA comes from the information provider, who, if his service is any good or controversial enough, finds his lines swamped with calls from all over the USA, leaving no capacity for local calls for which he does get paid. I am reminded of 415-976-GAYS in San Francisco as an example. Now, there are lots of adult conference bridges around but if you call one in your local community you are going to pay plenty for using it. So what did the guys start doing? They started calling conference bridges on 976 *in other states* where all they had to pay was toll. The information provider got nothing out of it. The Chicago area guys called the SFCA bridge and the west coast guys would call the Chicago bridge. Wouldn't you rather pay 13-16 cents per minute at night (rates back in the early 1980's when they finally clamped down on this) to talk dirty on the phone to a stranger than three dollars? At 415-976-GAYS a recorded announcement answered each call telling the caller, "You have reached the San Francisco Hot Adult Conference Line. If you are not eighteen years of age, hang up now! Plenty of lively adult conversations; just three dollars for three minutes ... have fun!" Of course that meant nothing to the 99 percent of the callers not in area 415/408 (as defined in those days), and at that all they would do is get on long enough to pass their number and invite calls. So they paid 35-40 cents for an evening of 'lively adult conversation' ... not a bad deal for the end user, but for the bridge tender it sucked. MCI was first, and since then AT&T and others have followed suit by refusing to connect with 976 under pressure from the local telcos who in turn were trying to placate their Information Provider clients. We went through this a couple times in the past when the 'beeper scare' in Manhattan, NY was prevalent. Fools over there would send pages to beepers all over the country on (I think) the 212-540 exchange hoping to get calls back and run up the bill. Despite well- meaning memos from telecom admins everwhere warning against 'return- ing calls to any 212-540 number because of fraud' I do not think anyone outside 212/718/914/516 was ever victimized. If anyone reading this is able to connect with a 976 (or similar, 'lookalike') number in another LATA, I'd be interested in details. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 19:38:24 -0400 From: tbresien@eia.org (Tim Bresien) Organization: EIA Subject: Record Number of SUPERCOMM Exhibitors Expected in New Orleans More than 650 companies are expected to pack the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center in New Orleans this June, showcasing the very latest in communications technology. The Exhibit Hall (which is open June 3-5) will feature six Pavilions among the 290,000 square feet which are dedicated to some of the industry's most dynamic technology segments: WIRELESS, INTERNET, MULTIMEDIA, CTI, SOFTWARE, & FIBER OPTICS. Attendance is expected to eclipse last year's record of over 37,000. And with good reason. The most comprehensive demonstrations and discussions of tomorrow's hottest technology will occur at SUPERCOMM '97 in conjunction with the show's 10th anniversary. How will the overwhelming need for greater bandwidth be satisfied ? ill wireless become the infrastructure of the future ? What does the convergence of the cable and telco industries mean for today's public networks ? What will Voice Over Internet mean to the long distance business ? How is the expansion of network technology, on-line content and high-speed access driving the development of interactive services ? The answers to these questions and many more can be found only at SUPERCOMM '97. World class educational opportunities, covering every aspect of communications, will be presented by industry leaders from among the most respected companies in the world and from these renowned organizations: The International Engineering Consortium The MultiMedia Telecommunications Association The International Communications Association The IEEE Computer Society ( Internet Computing Conference ) SUPERCOMM '97 is endorsed by the United States Department of Commerce International Buyer Program and offers special amenities to the international delegations and attendees which represented over 90 nations last year. SUPERCOMM is co-owned and sponsored by: The Telecommunications Industry Association and The United States Telephone Association www.super-comm.com For information on remaining exhibiting opportunities please contact: Tim Bresien (703) 907-7483 or tbresien@tia.eia.org For information on attending SUPERCOMM please call (800) 278-7372 in the U.S. or on-line at: www.super-comm.com ------------------------------ From: bob.savery@hawgwild.com (Bob Savery) Subject: Where Are the Numbers? Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 06:29:24 GMT Organization: HAWG WILD! BBS (402) 597-2666 With all the talk of area codes being added almost daily, the urgent need to go to 10 digit dialing for everything (or changing to 8 digit local numbers or ....) one would get the impression the US is close to being totally out of phone numbers soon. I think I read something recently that hinted that could happen as soon as 2009 or so. Perhaps I'm missing something somewhere. Last time I looked, there were 890 possible area codes (Why is 1xx reserved anyway? Why is N9x required to be reserved for additional digits for local numbers??). If you take that 890 times 999 exchange codes times 10000 numbers in each exchange, there should be 8,891,100,000 possible phone numbers available. Yes, I know not all of those can be used (you wouldn't want exchange numbers starting with 911 for instance), but the vast majority of those should be good numbers. Where am I off in my figuring?? If I'm even halfway close, we couldn't possibly run out of numbers for a long time, if ever! There just isn't 9 billion ports available in the telephone network! Nor will there be anytime in the near future! (I don't think??!) What prompted this was the BellSouth Press release announcing they now have 6 million access lines in Florida. By my figuring, you could fit 6 million lines into a single area code. And yet Florida has 10 and says they need more??! That's an average of 16.65 numbers per line! Even figuring DID numbers into business trunks, I don't see that many numbers being used. Someone please esplain dis to me so I can sleep at night again?? Thank You! Bob Savery bob.savery@hawgwild.com Sysop - HawgWild! BBS HawgWild! BBS = (402) 597-2666 - Modem hawgwild.com - telnet www.hawgwild.com - World Wide Wait ->5008 - RIME ------------------------------ From: Hillary@johngalt.com (Hillary Gorman) Subject: How Do They Do It? Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 02:46:09 PDT Check out SUBMITKING (http://www.submitking.com), the only place on the web to submit your URL to 100 marketing resources (search engines and the like) AUTOMATICLY for just $10US! Thanks for your time! Hillary ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #101 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Apr 25 01:52:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA20979; Fri, 25 Apr 1997 01:52:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 01:52:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199704250552.BAA20979@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #102 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Apr 97 01:52:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 102 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Note From Hillary Gorman Was a Fraud (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: How Do They Do It? (Hillary Gorman) GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming; North American Mobile (John Covert) AOL For FREE Scare, TAX 264, Etc, etc, etc. (Eric Florack) 10 Cent Calls to England! (Tad Cook) Another Interesting Site Connected With Spamford Wallace 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 24 Apr 1997 23:54:50 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Note From Hillary Gorman Was a Fraud In an earlier issue of the Digest, I ran a note from a person who was an imposter using the name 'Hillary Gorman'. The real Hillary Gorman is a long-time reader/supporter of this Digest, and as I explained to her in email, although I did not think much of the message in particular -- found it a little distasteful in fact -- because I *believed* it came from her I used it as a courtesy to her. I've since found out from quite a few people that it was a fraud. I apologize for running the message. PAT ------------------------------ From: hillary@hillary.net (Hillary Gorman) Subject: Re: How Do They Do It? Date: 24 Apr 1997 11:32:19 GMT Organization: Packet Shredders Anonymous In , Hillary Gorman wrote: > Check out SUBMITKING (http://www.submitking.com), the only place on > the web to submit your URL to 100 marketing resources (search engines > and the like) AUTOMATICLY for just $10US! > Thanks for your time! > Hillary Since I've been getting email all morning about this, I would just like to publicly state that although yes, hillary@*.* is USUALLY me :), this particular person is NOT me, did not hack one of my accounts, hopefully doesn't even realize she's "using my name." I remain stalwartly anti-spam and anti-luser ;) (of course I am pro-USER as always.) No need for further inquiries on the subject, Thanks, hillary gorman......................................hillary@netaxs.com If you need help, contact [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Hillary, I ran that message purely as a favor to 'you'. I thought it stunk; I thought, well, if she is doing it, okay as a favor I will give it a short blurb. I feel badly about it also. Typically I toss between two and three *dozen* items of spam in the bit bucket daily here. Yesterday in fact, the spam count was higher than usual. The one 'you' wrote was one of the least distasteful. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 97 22:46:52 EDT From: John R. Covert Subject: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming, and North American Mobile About a month ago, I had asked readers of Telecom to help me find a reliable company from which to rent GSM SIM cards for use in my GSM900 phone for occasional travel to Europe. I was unable to find any acceptable temporary rental. But since then, I have become one of the first people to actually roam in Europe on GSM900 with the same SIM card which is intended to be used in my new Omnipoint DCS1900 service in NYC. Since I don't live in NYC, I don't yet have a DCS1900 phone, but Omnipoint will be serving Boston next year, so I think I'll stay with them. In this article, I will try to present a brief but comprehensive overview of the international roaming situation and the various standards in use in North America and elsewhere. Contents: 1. The responses to my original request for rental SIM cards 2. What I ended up doing 3. Some GSM generalities 4. Systems within North America 1. The responses to my original request hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) had replied to tell me that "There's a company that has been set up specifically for this purpose." But he didn't remember the name. He suggested that I look on the GSM MoU page, contact them, and they would tell me the name. Well, the GSM MoU didn't even acknowledge the email I sent them, but their page did lead me towards a large list of American companies that have signed the GSM MoU and intend to offer GSM based services (always at 1900 MHz). I contacted almost every one of them, and the only one which had active international agreements was Omnipoint, which will be discussed later. None had the facilities to simply rent SIM cards on a short term basis. nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) had replied that AT&T would do it "through Vodaphone UK, but they do not say that". As it turns out, this is potentially interesting, but only for those people served by AT&T Wireless (formerly McCaw) and by Cantel. Since it's through Vodaphone, a well established UK GSM900 carrier, it benefits from a large number of existing roaming agreements all over the world. But the rates are terrible. First, you _must_ be one of their subscribers. They don't serve Boston, so they're useless for those of us in this area, regardless of who our carrier is. Second, the card costs $50/year. This isn't quite as bad as their rates. Outgoing calls are $2.49/minute, no matter where you are or where you're calling. From some places, this isn't too bad if you're calling back to the U.S., but it's ridiculous for local calls. Incoming is even worse, though. You pay that $2.49 per minute, *plus* a call to the U.K. (Always to the UK, no matter where you are.) And for Cantel customers, it's even worse. Not only are Canada to UK toll rates rather high, but you are charged the AT&T annual and per minute rates (charged in US dollars) plus a Cantel monthly fee of C$7.95. Nils also suggested trying the local telco in the country visited. This really doesn't work. Local telcos simply will not do business with non-residents. I have tried this in the UK, in Germany, and even in the Channel Islands. In the latter case, it seems that the Channel Islands company had to agree to not serve anyone outside the channel islands when they set up their roaming agreements with Vodaphone and Cellnet. And even if that isn't a problem, the credit departments simply aren't willing to take a chance on someone running up a large bill and being outside the reach of their local laws. There are, in some areas, pre-paid cards. But they only work within the country of issue (no roaming), and have fairly high activation fees, and expire if you don't use them for six months. The Italian example is as follows: you buy a card for Lit. 100,000, which includes a 50,000 ($29) activation fee and 50,000 worth of available usage. You can then buy recharges in either 50,000 or 100,000 denominations, but 10,000 ($6) of that is a recharge fee. Off-peak is cheap (195/min or about 12.5 cents), but peak is 10 times that. The advantage over roaming is that incoming is free. 2. What I ended up doing A friend lent me his second, and rarely used, German D1 card; I'll pay him for the usage while I have it. But this isn't a good long-term solution, so I also signed up with Omnipoint. When I had first called Omnipoint, they only had agreements with Vodaphone and the German D2 system (which is notoriously inferior to D1 in many areas I travel to). But since they were only $9.95 a month for the first three months, and no activation or cancellation fee, I decided to try them out. In the meantime, they have added Eircell, the Swiss PTT, and Libertel in the Netherlands. And they have signed agreements with Cellnet, both French carriers, and about twenty others, and are turning something new on every few weeks. They expect to add Hong Kong and South Africa next, and have said that France (my next trip is to France) should be on within a month. Omnipoint's rates are great (or seem to be; we'll see when the bill comes). For outgoing calls, they take the foreign carrier's wholesale rate and add a percentage to it. For example, on Vodaphone, they'll charge me 41p peak and 17p off-peak. For incoming, to anywhere in Europe, I pay just their standard international call rate of 99 cents; no local carrier charge. That means it's significantly cheaper for me to receive an incoming call in Europe with Omnipoint than in San Francisco with either of the two Boston AMPS carriers! And it's real GSM. I can control all the features on my NYC number while in Europe. Even call waiting works correctly. And I can receive short email messages (1917NXXXXXX@omnipoint.net), delivered very quickly, even while in Germany, and if I had a newer GSM900 phone that could send rather then just receive SMS messages, I could send them as well. 3. Some GSM generalities GSM isn't just GSM900. More importantly, it is the SIM card compatibility and the understandings that go with roaming agreements, including the interoperation of calling features and SMS messages. Certainly the most widespread GSM is the 900 MHz GSM in all of the world except North America. GSM is also used by the newer DCS-1800 companies, Orange and One-to-One in the UK and eplus in Germany. GSM will be done with DCS-1900 in the U.S., but not all 1900 MHz service in the U.S. is GSM. Various companies have announced multi-mode phones. Being a Motorola fan, the one I've looked at, which was shown at CeBit and is to be on the market later this year, is the dual mode MicroTAC International 8800: GSM900 for Europe and DCS-1900 for North America. This choice seems to be because these are the companies that are going to be establishing roaming agreements. The DCS-1800 companies are just not a large enough market to be very interesting for roaming yet. SIM cards are great. I was in a store in the UK and saw a StarTAC. I was able to pick it up, insert my own SIM card, and immediately play with it to my heart's content. The store owner didn't have to worry about his bill being run up. I want a dual mode StarTAC. 4. Systems within North America The U.S. mobile market is a sea of confusion, and to make any of the above information useful, an overview of what we have is necessary: AMPS, both analogue and digital, operates at just above 850 MHz. NAMPS was a Motorola idea for stuffing three calls into each channel which never really caught on. Digital AMPS is either CDMA or TDMA, with some carriers choosing TDMA (mostly "A" carriers) and others (mostly "B" carriers) choosing CDMA. The digital phones are always dual mode so that you can fall back to analogue when outside the areas served with Digital sites. The digital sites use the same frequencies, allocating some channels to analog and others to digital. NEXTEL has managed to gather together the frequencies just below 850MHz in a nationwide system which only serves major metro areas and major highways between them. It's digital only, using IDEN/TDMA technology. Their Canadian partner's name is Clearnet. The 1900 MHz spectrum is to be divided among as many as six carriers in each geographic area. The A/B bands are 30MHz wide; the C/D/E/F bands are 10MHz wide. Carriers will be able to offer a variety of incompatible services in these bands. Omnipoint, Sprint-Spectrum-APC, BellSouthDCS, VoiceStream, Pacific Bell, Western Wireless, Aerial, Microcell (in Canada), and a few others will be offering SIM card based GSM service. Other carriers (including notably SprintPCS) are offering incompatible, non SIM card, non GSM services. It will certainly take these carriers at least five to ten years to reach the level of coverage that the current AMPS companies have. While they will quickly be able to provide superior service in cities, when driving out in the countryside, only AMPS will be acceptable for quite some time to come. In summary, the North American market continues to be characterized by the presence of so many different carriers and different systems that we will remain behind the rest of the world in both market penetration and coverage quality for quite a while. /john ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 07:09:18 PDT From: Eric Florack Subject: AOL For FREE Scare, TAX 264, Etc, etc, etc. I posted the following note to my group in response to RFI's on AOL4FREE.COM We had an attack a while back of the mail-note scares, and I was forced to deal with it. However, this particular situation has developed a bit differently, as you will see. I'll pass this on as an FYI. Feel free to distribute this to your own orgs, if you feel the need. /E ---------- You will recall I posted a note about this previously, in response to a note being circulated among our group. Since that time, it's been found that we are dealing with three separate problems, all of them using the AOL4FREE name, thereby causing some degree of confusion. Here's the facts: First there was actually a program called AOL4REE, which was intended to run on MACINTOSH systems, and thereby doesn't affect PC's at all. Then, there was a hoax about an E-MAIL virus by the same name. Finally, there is the AOL4FREE.COM which comes as an attachment to mailnotes. I have reason to *suspect* that what happened, here, was that the first few people who got hit with this mis-identified the Trojan Horse (which AOL4FREE.COM is) as a Virus. It's a fairly common error, since most people don't understand the difference.You see, a Trojan Horse is a real program, not a virus. While it is a real program it does not do what it purports to do, much like the Trojan horse of Greek legend ... thus the name. In this case, instead of giving you what the title implies, it formats your hard drive ... and in the process, commits suicide by erasing itself. (Thus preventing re-distribution of the file, as you will see) I also suspect that this file is written by someone who knows very little about programming. (To the techs: the file appears to be compiled in BAT2EXE, meaning all this clown knows is batch language, which he then compiled with Boling's program to cover his tracks.) Since it's not a virus, it won't be detected by virus detectors. The lesson here, is this: If you are not absolutely sure of the origin of the software, don't use it. Final note: Since this program, by it's nature, needs to be sent ctly to you by the author, or at least by someone who has not run the program, the chances of your actually seeing a copy of this horse in the wild seems remote at worst. This is not likely to be something one of your friends will send to you. With those facts in mind, I'd not worry overmuch about this one. If you see it, of course don't run it. If you DO run it, call tech support right away before attempting anything, because they MAY be able to undelete your files. I've taken the liberty of attaching the text from the web address mentioned in the TAX. Make particular note, please, of the last paragraph. -=-=-= =1= H-47a: AOL4FREE.COM Trojan Horse Program Destroys Hard Drives April 17, 1997 23:00 GMT PROBLEM: A Trojan Horse program called AOL4FREE.COM that deletes all files on a hard drive is circulating the Internet. PLATFORM: DOS/Windows-based PCs DAMAGE: When the AOL4FREE.COM program is executed, all files and directories on the users C: drive are deleted. SOLUTION: DO NOT execute this program. If the program starts executing, quickly pressing Ctrl-C will save some of your files. VULNERABILITY Users who download the trojaned AOL4FREE.COM program and ASSESSMENT: executes it will destroy all the files and directories on their DOS C: drive. CIAC has obtained a Trojaned copy of AOL4FREE.COM that destroys hard drives. ***NOTE: This is different from the AOL4FREE Virus Warning hoax message.**** CIAC has obtained a Trojaned copy of the AOL4FREE.COM program that, if run, deletes all the files on a user's hard drive. If you are e-mailed this file, or if you have downloaded it from an online service, do not attempt to run it. If the program was received as an attachment to an e-mail message, do not double click (open) it. Opening an attached program runs that program, which in this case deletes all the files on your hard drive. The original AOL4FREE was a Macintosh program for fraudulently creating free AOL (America Online) accounts. Note that any attempt to use the original AOL4FREE program may subject you to prosecution. NOTE: Most antivirus programs will not detect this or other Trojan Horse programs. Detection ========= AOL4FREE.COM is a Trojan program that is 993 bytes (2 sectors) long. The following text is readable in the AOL4FREE.COM file if you display it with the DOS TYPE command or the DOS EDIT program. Compiled by BAT2EXEC 1.5 PC Magazine . Douglas Boling Note that this text may appear in any program compiled with the BAT2EXEC program and has nothing to do with the Trojan Horse. If you open the AOL4FREE.COM file with a disk editor or with the Windows Notepad program, the following text is found at the end of the second sector of the file. PATH COMMANDC earc /C C: /C CD\ DELTREE /y *.* ECHOOYOUR COMPUTER HAS JUST BEEN F***ED BY *VP* F*** YOU AOL-LAMER Where F*** is a common vulgar explicative. Recovery ======== Pressing Ctrl-C before the Trojan Horse finishes deleting all your files will save some of them. If the program runs to completion, all the files on your root drive will have been deleted. The files are deleted with the DOS DELTREE command, so the contents of the files are still on your hard disk, only the directory entries have been deleted. Any program that can recover deleted files will allow you to recover some or all of the files on your hard disk. While attempting to recover files, be sure to not write any new files onto the hard disk as the new files may overwrite the contents of a deleted file, making it impossible to recover. You will probably have to boot your system with a floppy and run any recovery programs from there. If you happen to have one of the delete tracking programs installed on your system (a program that keeps track of deleted files in case you want them back) the recovery operation will be relatively simple. Follow the directions in your delete tracking program to recover your files. If not, you will probably have to recover each file individually, supplying the first character of the file name, which is overwritten in the directory when the file is deleted. Most DOS/Windows disk tools programs also have the capability for recovering deleted files so follow the directions included with those programs to do so. Background ========== The original AOL4FREE Macintosh program was developed to fraudulently create free AOL accounts. The creator of that program has pleaded guilty to defrauding America Online for distributing that program. Anyone else attempting to use that program to defraud AOL could also be prosecuted. ***(Eric notes: That program won't run on PC's, in any case.) The AOL4FREE Virus Warning message has been circulating about the Internet and warns of an AOL4FREE virus infected e-mail message that infects and destroys a system when the message is read, but that warning is a hoax and not about this Trojan horse. 1. The AOL4FREE.COM program is a Trojan Horse, not a virus. It does not spread on its own. 2. A Trojan Horse must be run to do any damage. 3. Reading an e-mail message with the Trojan Horse program as an attachment will not run the Trojan Horse and will not do any damage. Note that opening an attached program from within an e-mail reader runs that attached program, which may make it appear that reading the attachment caused the damage. Users should keep in mind that any file with a .COM or .EXE extension is a program, not a document and that double clicking or opening that program will run it. Macintosh users have the additional problem that Macintosh programs do not have readable extensions, and so are more difficult to detect. Extra care should be taken to insure that you do not unintentionally execute an attached program. CIAC still affirms that reading an e-mail message, even one with an attached program, can not do damage to a system. The attachment must be both downloaded onto the system and run to do any damage. -0- ------------------------------ Subject: 10 Cent Calls to England! Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 17:57:39 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Report: Sprint cutting international telephone rates ARLINGTON, Va. (AP) -- Sprint is set to lower weekend rates for telephone calls abroad as consumers benefit from the elimination of trade barriers and increased traffic on the international network, USA Today reported today. Sprint's announcement today will cut rates to as low as 10 cents per minute on the weekend, making a call to England as cheap as a domestic call, according to the report. Sprint had been charging 45 cents a minute. Weekend calls to Germany, Italy and France will fall to 30 cents a minute, from 45 cents now. Weekday rates are higher. AT&T and MCI charge 12 cents a minute for calls to Britain, seven days a week, 24 hours a day. All three carriers impose a $3 monthly fee for discount rates. "The difference between domestic and international rates will diminish," said Daniel Alcazar, Sprint's director of international marketing. Among the reasons for the cuts are a World Trade Organization pact in February, which is opening the $580 billion global market. State-owned monopolies are lowering rates charged to foreign carriers connecting to their networks. Also, traffic on the global network is growing, allowing big phone companies to buy access to other countries at lower bulk rates, Alcazar said. ------------------------------ From: davet1979@aol.com (Davet1979) Subject: Another Interesting Site Connected With Spamford Wallace Date: 25 Apr 1997 02:39:50 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com I thought this might be somewhat on topic, and possibly when you make your contact with CyberPromotions/AGIS, you might mention the other 'interests' that CyberPromotions hosts. A note: Maybe someone has mentioned this on the list before, but I just heard about it today on GloRadio's "Daily Dose" (http://www.gloradio.com/): http://www.godhatesfags.com/ I can't believe someone even let them register that domain name. Did you actually look at the page? It is a very fearsome thing. A church is supposed to be a place of community where all can worship if they choose to honor that particular god -- it's not about the pure hatred and petty name-calling I saw on that page. I sent them a civil email asking why they're doing this (you basically get one shot to email them because they have filters set up and a whole lot of email protection). ---------------- Now, look at the InterNic record of whom owns this domain name ... Westboro Baptist Church GODHATESFAGS-DOM 3701 Southwest 12th Street Topeka, KS 66604 Phone: (913)273-0325 USA Domain Name: GODHATESFAGS.COM Administrative Contact: Phelps, Benjamin BP1521 wbc@EPLEX.COM 913-233-4162 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: ==> Wallace, Sanford SW1708 domreg@CYBERPROMO.COM <== ==> 215-628-9780 <== Billing Contact: Phelps, Benjamin BP1521 wbc@EPLEX.COM 913-233-4162 Record last updated on 12-Apr-97. Record created on 22-Jan-97. Database last updated on 22-Apr-97 06:32:10 EDT. Domain servers in listed order: NS7.CYBERPROMO.COM 205.199.2.250 NS9.CYBERPROMO.COM 207.124.161.50 NS8.CYBERPROMO.COM 207.124.161.65 NS5.CYBERPROMO.COM 205.199.212.50 NS10.CYBERPROMO.COM 208.5.10.100 ---------------------- Doesn't THAT seem appropriate for a company who spams people every day? Very professional, eh? Dave [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes indeed, isn't that a very professional attitude? I thank you *very much* for calling this to the attention of our readers. When contacting AGIS, you might want to discuss this other 'venture' of Spamford Wallace. God hates Fags, huh? Amazing ... maybe its time to raise a little hell with Internic on that one. Oh well, a lot of good that would do I suppose. I pity the folks at Westboro Baptist Church if a few hackers decide to re-arrange their web page, as was done with the Department of Injustice not too long ago. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #102 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat Apr 26 09:04:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA15315; Sat, 26 Apr 1997 09:04:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 09:04:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199704261304.JAA15315@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #103 TELECOM Digest Sat, 26 Apr 97 09:03:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 103 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (Nils Andersson) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (Hugh A. Pritchard) Re: Another Interesting Site Connected With Spamford Wallace (Chris Ambler) Re: Another Interesting Site Connected With Spamford Wallace (Steve Bagdon) Re: Listing of 976 'Look Alikes' (Linc Madison) Re: Listing of 976 'Look Alikes' (Lord Somnolent) Re: Wanted to Buy: 80-col Punch Cards (Dave Close) Re: US West Fighting Flood (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Re: Are We to Believe This? (Tim Russell) Re: Are We to Believe This? (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: Are We to Believe This? (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Re: Some General Questions For Readers (Chuck Maurer) Re: Heads Up - FCC Issues 800 Order (Greg Ramsey) Re: Cyberpromo's Upstream Provider (Jay R. Ashworth) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming, and North American Mobile Date: 26 Apr 1997 02:01:38 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com In article , John R. Covert writes: > nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) had replied that AT&T would do it > "through Vodaphone UK, but they do not say that". Yes indeed. Also, while in a GSM country, call somebody with caller ID, in-country. Normally, your VODAPHONE number will show up on the callers id display. People can now call you on this number. It is NOT necessarily stable, and may be different on your next trip. It WILL save your caller money if he is in the UK or if he can call a UK number more cheaply than a US number. Whether it will save you the callee money is unclear. (You should not have to pay the US/UK hop, but I am not sure how the billing works). > As it turns out, this is potentially interesting, but only for those > people served by AT&T Wireless (formerly McCaw) and by Cantel. Since > it's through Vodaphone, a well established UK GSM900 carrier, it benefits > from a large number of existing roaming agreements all over the world. > But the rates are terrible. Oh yes. > First, you _must_ be one of their subscribers. > They don't serve Boston, so they're useless for those of us in this area, > regardless of who our carrier is. Second, the card costs $50/year. This > isn't quite as bad as their rates. Outgoing calls are $2.49/minute, no > matter where you are or where you're calling. From some places, this isn't > too bad if you're calling back to the U.S., but it's ridiculous for local > calls. Incoming is even worse, though. You pay that $2.49 per minute, > *plus* a call to the U.K. (Always to the UK, no matter where you are.) See above. > And for Cantel customers, it's even worse. Not only are Canada to UK > toll rates rather high, but you are charged the AT&T annual and per > minute rates (charged in US dollars) plus a Cantel monthly fee of C$7.95. > Nils also suggested trying the local telco in the country visited. > This really doesn't work. Local telcos simply will not do business with > non-residents. I have tried this in the UK, in Germany, and even in the > Channel Islands. True, unfortunately. > In the latter case, it seems that the Channel Islands > company had to agree to not serve anyone outside the channel islands when > they set up their roaming agreements with Vodaphone and Cellnet. And even > if that isn't a problem, the credit departments simply aren't willing to > take a chance on someone running up a large bill and being outside the > reach of their local laws. > There are, in some areas, pre-paid cards. But they only work within the > country of issue (no roaming), and have fairly high activation fees, and Sweden has prepaids for SEK 7/3 for day/night calls. (about USD 1/0.5) > expire if you don't use them for six months. The Italian example is as > follows: you buy a card for Lit. 100,000, which includes a 50,000 ($29) > activation fee and 50,000 worth of available usage. You can then buy > recharges in either 50,000 or 100,000 denominations, but 10,000 ($6) > of that is a recharge fee. Off-peak is cheap (195/min or about 12.5 cents), > but peak is 10 times that. The advantage over roaming is that incoming > is free. > 2. What I ended up doing > A friend lent me his second, and rarely used, German D1 card; I'll pay him > for the usage while I have it. This is what I do. My friend in Sweden gets billed, and I pay him. > But this isn't a good long-term solution, > so I also signed up with Omnipoint. This is an OK solution if most of your incoming calls come from the US. If they come in locally, it gets bad, routing Euro/US/Euro with the caller and the callee each paying one lap. > When I had first called Omnipoint, > they only had agreements with Vodaphone and the German D2 system (which > is notoriously inferior to D1 in many areas I travel to). But since they > were only $9.95 a month for the first three months, and no activation or > cancellation fee, I decided to try them out. In the meantime, they have > added Eircell, the Swiss PTT, and Libertel in the Netherlands. And they > have signed agreements with Cellnet, both French carriers, and about twenty > others, and are turning something new on every few weeks. They expect to > add Hong Kong and South Africa next, and have said that France (my next > trip is to France) should be on within a month. > Omnipoint's rates are great (or seem to be; we'll see when the bill comes). > For outgoing calls, they take the foreign carrier's wholesale rate and add > a percentage to it. For example, on Vodaphone, they'll charge me 41p peak > and 17p off-peak. About right. > SIM cards are great. I was in a store in the UK and saw a StarTAC. I > was able to pick it up, insert my own SIM card, and immediately play with > it to my heart's content. The store owner didn't have to worry about his > bill being run up. I want a dual mode StarTAC. Why didn't the US carriers (inlcluding CDMA) use the same compatible SIM technology? Would have worked, regardless of air interface! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 16:55:25 -0400 From: Hugh A. Pritchard Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming > Omnipoint, Sprint-Spectrum-APC, BellSouthDCS, VoiceStream, Pacific Bell, > Western Wireless, Aerial, Microcell (in Canada), and a few others will be > offering SIM card based GSM service. I've had GSM/SIM card service from Sprint Spectrum (APC) since the beginning of the calendar year, here in the Washington-Baltimore area. APC (doing business as Sprint Spectrum) has been offering GSM service for at least a year and a half. Its GSM operates at the high end of 1800 MHz. I realize I'm giving up roaming capability, since no other North American market has anybody using GSM. That's OK, because Sprint Spectrum's GSM penetrates buildings better, is clearer, and reputedly has never been cloned. Hugh Pritchard, 202/767-7528 or HughP@library.NRL.Navy.mil page 301/237-1231 Naval Research Lab code 5220, Washington, DC 20375 ------------------------------ From: chris@kosh.punk.net (Christopher Ambler) Subject: Re: Another Interesting Site Connected With Spamford Wallace Date: 25 Apr 1997 15:57:24 GMT Organization: Punknet Secret Headquarters and Day Care Centre > God hates Fags, huh? Amazing ... maybe its time to raise a little > hell with Internic on that one. Oh well, a lot of good that would do > I suppose. I pity the folks at Westboro Baptist Church if a few > hackers decide to re-arrange their web page, as was done with the > Department of Injustice not too long ago. PAT] Hell has been raised. In fact, I was just on CNET's "The Web" show a couple of weeks ago over this. They had a member of GLAAD from LA and myself discussing this issue. Apparently, GLAAD tried to register "the n-word".com as a protest, AND WERE TURNED DOWN by the InterNIC. So they asked me if we had such a policy at Image Online Design for .WEB, and I told them no, we don't censor. Register what you like, and if someone's offended, expect them to take it up with you. To be honest, don't blame the InterNIC on the "godhatesfags" name, but DO blame them that they allow some and don't allow others. In England, isn't that domain name "godhatescigarettes.com?" The point is, I think, that much like anyone can say anything they want, anyone can register any domain they want -- don't blame the registrar, blame the IDIOT who gets the domain. Director, Punknet Internet Cooperative | President, Image Online Design, Inc. chris@kosh.punk.net | chris@iodesign.com http://www.punk.net | http://www.iodesign.com | Voice+18055434716 Fax+18055434735 ------------------------------ From: bagdon@rust.net (Steve Bagdon) Subject: Re: Another Interesting Site Connected With Spamford Wallace Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 21:19:18 GMT Reply-To: bagdon@rust.net davet1979@aol.com (Davet1979) said: > I thought this might be somewhat on topic, and possibly when you > make your contact with CyberPromotions/AGIS, you might mention the > other 'interests' that CyberPromotions hosts. A note: > Maybe someone has mentioned this on the list before, but I just heard about it today on GloRadio's "Daily Dose" (http://www.gloradio.com/): > http://www.godhatesfags.com/ > I can't believe someone even let them register that domain name. Hey! What are you doing?!?! Personally I find this *extrememly* offensive, but does that give me the right to censure it. NO! The TV has an 'off button', and my browser has a stop button (and what am I doing loading this to begin with?!?!). But what happens if someone hates *my* domain (say, http://www.rust.net). I don't have to restrict someone else's domain name - I simply don't load it! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > God hates Fags, huh? Amazing ... maybe its time to raise a little > hell with Internic on that one. Oh well, a lot of good that would do I > suppose. I pity the folks at Westboro Baptist Church if a few hackers > decide to re-arrange their web page, as was done with the Department > of Injustice not too long ago. PAT] See above. That's censorship. Until you can prove it prevokes social unrest or can be considered a threat to national security, they should have the right to be distasteful. Spamming should be a felony -- you send it to me unsolicited, I have usually have to pay for it. But a bad domain name -- so what? I just don't load it. *I* have to do something to view it. What next? Vanity plates? Book titles? Company names? Steve B. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dear First Amendment Lover, yes, I am a censor, and proud of it. I always did feel the First Amendment to the US Constitution was a nuisance we could do without. The trouble with all you liberal and open-minded people is ... well, don't get me started on this one please. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Listing of 976 'Look Alikes' Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 22:42:39 -0700 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , netnut@loyolanet. campus.mci.net wrote: > Got this off a website which specializes in colleges and universities > () > 976 look-alikes > MCI has identified a list of numbers that you may want to block. > Increased demand for pay-per-call services has exceeded the capacity > of "976" exchanges in many metropolitan areas. ... While this is NOT a > comprehensive list, we hope this will help reduce the volume of this > type of fraud. > > Massachusetts > (607) 940-XXXX > (607) 555-XXXX These should be 617, not 607 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for going to all the trouble, > but it may not be a big issue. Typically 976 and related prefixes > are blocked from outside the LATA where they are located, mainly > because there is no mechanism in place to bill for them. Hmm. I thought I had been told that in California I could call any 976 number in the state, whether in my LATA or not, and I would be billed the surcharge as well as any applicable tolls, but I just tried 213-976-WAKE and got an intercept that my call could not be completed. Of course, there is also a 415-976-WAKE, so the test may not be an accurate indication. I tried 213-976-3825 (spelling left as an exercise to the reader ;->) which also didn't work, and I would expect that's not simply a replication of the same number in 415. I didn't get an intercept after 1-213-976, but then I don't get an intercept after other non-existent NXX's, although I do get an immediate intercept on 1-213-1XX or 0XX. (I wonder if anyone has 976-6466 -- "Tired of phony psychics? Don't dial the wrong number, dial 213-WRONG-NO instead!") In any event, I would like to compile a similar, but more useful, list for my web pages on . I'd like to make a list of all the international prefixes set up for phone sex and other operations where the "information provider" receives a portion of the foreign telco's termination fee for the call. For the NANP Caribbean, I'd like to get both the area code and the prefix (e.g., 1-809-490, 1-268-404, 1-664-410, 1-758-???); for areas outside the NANP (i.e., calls that are prefixed with "011" from the U.S./Canada), I'd like to get the country code and any information on the sub-range that is used for these "kickback" operations (e.g., 011-592-59, 011-599-6, 011-239-?, 011-683-?, 011-373-?, etc.). It appears from the examples I've seen that each country segregates these numbers into a distinct sub-range, so that neither the telco nor the IP has to deal with non-revenue local calls. The company I work for recently had a large unexplained toll call to Niger (+227); are there any kickback numbers there? If you have seen ads on the Internet or in freebie papers or wherever for these international numbers -- especially any that don't fall in the specific ranges listed above -- please e-mail me. Anything that is a sex line, horoscopes, or any of the usual 976/900 sorts of fare. Please reply to me directly by e-mail; I'll summarize the results on my web pages and also in the Digest. Be sure to un-spam-filter my address, though. ** Do not spam e-mail me! ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best-com >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << [TELECOM Digest Censor's Note: Actually I think I should have said that 976 and its relatives do not ever leave the state they are in in some cases. California is like that; yes you can call all over the state, but you cannot call my 976's and I cannot call yours. Around here, Ameritech is even tighter; I do not think you can get into 976 if not in the same LATA. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:17:52 -0400 From: Lord Somnolent Organization: KoB Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Listing of 976 'Look Alikes' NetNut! wrote: > Massachusetts > (508) 940-XXXX > (607) 940-XXXX > (607) 555-XXXX Er, you must mean 617 for 607. Here is the full list of Massachusetts pay-per-call COs, applicable across 617/508/413(781/978): 550 - Group Conversation Bridging 554 - Adult Information Services 920 - General Business Information 940 - Adult Programs 976 - General All lines are set up by default to block 554 and 940 numbers, you must write NYNEX to get the block removed. The other three can be dialed from most phones. Also the 617-555 exchange isn't a pay-per-call CO. [TELECOM Digest Censor's Note: Thanks for the correction which also got past me. Again, the thing people need to remember is to watch out for 976, etc **within your own state and LATA**. Generally you do not need to be on guard for these from other areas of the US than your own. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@compata.compata.com (Dave Close) Subject: Re: Wanted to Buy: 80-col Punch Cards Date: 24 Apr 1997 22:36:29 -0700 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California davem@whidbey.net (Dave Miller) writes: > I'm looking for a couple or three boxes of 96! column cards in > specific colors, too. The IBM 3624 ATM (automatic teller machine) prints its receipts on 96-column cards. These machines are still in use so the cards must be available. If asking for 96-column cards doesn't ring a bell with a supplier, try asking for ATM receipt stock. Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "Politics is the business of getting dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 power and privilege without dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 21:20:46 -0500 From: Scot E. Wilcoxon Subject: Re: US West Fighting Flood I discovered a press release on http://www.uswest.com/ about the Grand Forks situation. See the "About" page for the "Press Releases" link. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One really heroic effort in Grand Forks > is being made by the local newspaper which ... > They have not missed a single issue of publication, They've been publishing from the St. Paul Pioneer Press facilities, three-quarters of a state away. The Pioneer Press included the Grand Forks newspaper inside theirs for one issue last week along with an explanation of the story behind the stories. Several people noted that although they are publishing, they certainly can't deliver to their subscribers. I think Clinton also made a comment that he didn't know how they were publishing either, so you're not alone in your ignorance. But then it's not your field and you've not made ignorance an art. Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org Laws are society's common sense, written down for the stupid. The stupid refuse to read. Their lawyers read to them. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Response: I am not quite sure how to read that final paragraph ... who are you calling ignorant anyway? Yes, I admit I am ignorant, and proud of it. I always did think that schools and education were a nuisance. PAT] ------------------------------ From: russell@probe.net (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: Are We to Believe This? Date: 24 Apr 1997 13:16:34 GMT Organization: Probe Technology Internet Services russell@probe.net (Tim Russell) writes: > Bruce Martin writes: >> Electronic stalker is making their life hell Well, as a follow-up, it was reported on the 22nd that the family's child had finally confessed that the whole thing was his doing, and that it was a "prank that got out of control". Ontario police said he wouldn't be prosecuted. Personally, considering the resources he wasted, I think he should be made to pay a rather large sum. I hope at least his parents will put him through hell. Tim Russell System Admin, Probe Technology email: russell@probe.net "The worst censorship is self-censorship, because fear has no limits." -- Grady Ward ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: Are We to Believe This? Date: 24 Apr 1997 20:08:31 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer, it appears, had nothing > to do with the house, and everything to do with the home, if you > get my drift. Poor Billy, I hope whatever demons are troubling him > will be driven away with therapy. Well, Pat, from the wire service piece I read, he sounded like a smart ass kid who's games got away from him. I don't think he's in nearly as bad shape mentally as the picture you paint. If I'm wrong, of course, my apologies to him, but as I say, that's not the impression I got. > Poor Billy; I hope somehow he gets the help he needs. PAT] In any case; and from the tone of the piece, I gather the local Law are letting the parents deal with the situation, and that the parents actually _plan_ to. Both of these are refreshing developments. This isn't really telecom any longer; followups set. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "To really blow up an investment house requires Tampa Bay, Florida a human being." - Mark Stalzer +1 813 790 7592 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Imagine ... parents taking responsibility for their children instead of blaming the teachers, the television and the internet chat rooms. What an outlandish suggestion. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 21:49:19 -0500 From: "Scot E. Wilcoxon" Subject: Re: Are We to Believe This? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer, it appears, had nothing > to do with the house, and everything to do with the home, The problems in that building could also have been blamed on a poltergeist. Investigators have usually found a teenager in a poltergeist-haunted building, and hidden cameras tended to solve the mystery when the teen did not know there was a camera pointed in their direction. Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org Laws are society's common sense, written down for the stupid. The stupid refuse to read. Their lawyers read to them. ------------------------------ From: bcareis@airmail.net (Chuck Maurer) Subject: Re: Some General Questions For Readers Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 01:32:19 GMT Organization: BloodCare es008d@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Ernst Smith) wrote: > I've gone through some of the past Digests but I still have a few > questions: > Is the number displayed on Caller ID extracted from the ANI or does a > seperate number travel through the telephone network along with the > privacy information? > When recieving calls orginating from inside PBXes sometimes Caller ID > will display the DID number or a main switchboard number and sometimes > it will display the number of the outgoing line. How does the PBX > operator "replace" the Caller ID number of their outgoing line? (This > is related to the question above). Our PBX send the number of the outbound trunk, not the phone number of the station within the bldg. This would cause a problem if the extension was not within the range that the CO can dial to. Our PBX receives calls to 351-8XXX. If extension 8123 dialed, it would work (351-8123). But if extension 7123 did it, the result would be the number of someone else in the neighborhood. The caller ID box of people we call will show a number that doesn't start with 351-8XXX and is not recognizable as us if it wasn't for the name display. > Are the (blue coinless) Charge-A-Call public telephones different from > POTS residential phones in terms of wiring or signalling? Who manufact- > ures them? > Is there any technical reason why the Charge-A-Call phones cannot not > accept incoming calls? > Most hotels have room phones with a message waiting light connected to > their PBX. With the advent of VoiceMail from the telcos, is there an > official standard for a Message Waiting Indicator on POTS phones? I don't know if it is official, but phone systems will present a stutter dial tone instead of a steady dial tone as a Message Waiting Indicator. I have seen a phone that periodically go off hook while idle to check the dial tone for stutter and turn on the light if it stutters. Chuck Maurer / BloodCare / Dallas, TX ------------------------------ From: wireless@cdc.net Subject: Re: Heads Up - FCC Issues 800 Order Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 11:02:26 GMT Organization: Netcom Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > The COMMISSION ESTABLISHES RULES PROMOTING EFFICIENT USE, FAIR > DISTRIBUTION OF TOLL FREE NUMBERS. Report No: CC-97-17. by 2nd R&O & > FNPRM. Action by: the Commission. Adopted: April 4, 1997. Dkt No.: > CC-95-155. (FCC No. 97-123) > 2. Rebuttal Presumption of Hoarding. > Hoarding is defined as a toll free subscriber acquiring more numbers > from a RespOrg than it intends to use immediately. I wonder what the definition of "immediately" is? How will this impact on paging providers and others who would have 800/888 numbers set aside for accounts that are not in service yet? I personally manage an inventory of over 5,000 800/888 numbers and in no way am I hoarding though I do wish I had more numbers for rotating stock. Greg Ramsey wireless@cdc.net ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: Cyberpromo's Upstream Provider Date: 24 Apr 1997 20:14:34 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates Doug Terman (antilles@madriver.com) wrote: > I also suggest to her that there might be a few other unhappy email > account holders calling and she. . . sighed. . ., saying, "I think > you're right." I thought folks might be interested in the most recent revision of the file I include in "Notices of Violation, 47 USC 227" to spammers and the related postmasters: ====================== Notice of Violation of Federal Law United States Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, says that "it shall be unlawful for any person within the United States to use any telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send an unsolicited advertisement to a telephone facsimile machine." A telephone facsimile machine is defined in Section 227(a)(2)(B) as "equipment which has the capacity to transcribe text or images (or both) from an electronic signal received over a regular telephone line onto paper." Pursuant to this definition, a computer/modem/printer meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for each violation. Please stop this. You have been put on notice. I have recorded your site name; further UNSOLICITED and UNWANTED junk mail from your site will force me to follow up under federal law. ======================= Notice to Postmasters Your systems were used to send this message. If this is contrary to your AUP's, please act accordingly. If it is not, you may wish to take advice on whether not adding such a provision leaves you open to legal exposure. Please note that you may have gotten this message even if it's obvious to me that your machine was used solely as a transit system for the email in question; I mean to cause you to decide that a bit more care in the choice of whose mail to forward would be A Good Thing. And, you may even have received a copy of this if you simply provide wholesale connectivity to a sender of unsolicited commercial email -- this shouldn't remain An Acceptable Dodge, either. Finally, please note that if your company policy is such that you appear to publically not care whether your customers behave in unethical or illegal manners -- yes, AGIS, I mean _you_ -- then any legal theories which make you civilly or criminally liable in tort or statue _will_ be pursued. Govern yourself accordingly. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- While the legal theory behind applying '227 to spammers has, admittedly, not been tested at the bench, it seems to work pretty effectively. You folks might all also be interested to know that I (just) found myself on Spamford's list this past Saturday afternoon. I called his (non-800) phone line, pressed 4, and told them to take my addresses (listed) off their lists, and not to allow them to be added again. I also filled in the form on their website. I gave them until this past Wednesday, by date, to get it taken care of... and they did. Whether the included '227 threats helped or not is unknown; I'll let you know if I see any more from them. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth High Technology Systems Consulting Ashworth Designer Linux: Where Do You Want To Fly Today? & Associates ka1fjx/4 "...short of hiring the Unabomber, how can I +1 813 790 7592 jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us get back at them?" --Andy Cramer NIC: jra3 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #103 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 28 09:10:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA05648; Mon, 28 Apr 1997 09:10:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 09:10:17 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199704281310.JAA05648@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #104 TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Apr 97 09:10:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 104 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Web Developer's Guide to Sound and Music" (Rob Slade) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (John R. Covert) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (David Smith) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (Karim Alim) Cellular Problem Dialing More Than 10 Digits (Jon Solomon) NPAs in Jeopardy Situation (BBethea505@aol.com) Cell Phone Cancer Study (Stewart Fist) Share the Wealth (ya) (Steven Lichter) Incredible Chutzpah (Andy Sherman) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 09:47:27 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Web Developer's Guide to Sound and Music" BKWDGTSM.RVW 961219 "Web Developer's Guide to Sound and Music", Anthony Helmstetter/Ron Simpson, 1996, 1-883577-95-0, U$39.99/C$55.99 %A Anthony Helmstetter %A Ron Simpson %C 7339 East Acoma Drive, #7, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 %D 1996 %G 1-883577-95-0 %I Coriolis %O U$39.99/C$55.99 800-410-0192 +1-602-483-0192 fax: +1-602-483-0193 %P 336 %T "Web Developer's Guide to Sound and Music" Even if you present it in thorough detail, as the authors do, telling people how to add a sound link to a Web page only takes a small chapter. What this book does, then, is to give those who don't have a background in the technology of music on the computer a thorough overview of music and sound development. This ranges from simple capture of sound clips through editing and all the way up to recording at professional studios. For those already into the audio aspect of computer multimedia this will be a very simple text, but for the majority of Web developers it provides a guide to all aspects. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKWDGTSM.RVW 961219 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sun 27 Apr 97 15:12:06 EDT Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming From: John R. Covert First I'd like to correct an error in my previous message. The Motorola International 8800 is dual-mode 900/1800 MHz with the intention of giving European 1800 MHz customers the ability to roam on 900MHz. I'm not sure why I had thought it was 1900MHz/900MHz. Wishful thinking and late-night surfing, I suppose. Tri-mode phones are hoped to appear by next year. In reply to my message, nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) had written: > Yes indeed. Also, while in a GSM country, call somebody with caller ID, > in-country. Normally, your VODAPHONE number will show up on the callers id > display. People can now call you on this number. That would indeed tell us a little more about how the AT&T/Vodaphone SIMcard hack works. In the case of a real international SIMcard, at least in the case of my New York SIMcard, calls within the UK showed up last week as "number withheld". I should have stuck the D1 card I had with me into the phone and checked that out. With a real SIM card, you really don't have a number within the country in which you're roaming; it's not needed at all for outgoing, and the temporary number used to route incoming calls to you can be released for reuse by someone else as soon as call setup has completed. > Why didn't the US carriers (including CDMA) use the same compatible SIM > technology? Would have worked, regardless of air interface! Utter stupidity, I must say. The only benefit of not using SIM cards is that it makes the phone slightly cheaper; the cost of the SIM card slot mechanical and electrical interface probably adds about $20 to the cost of the phone; well worth it in my opinion. And Hugh A. Pritchard wrote: > I've had GSM/SIM card service from Sprint Spectrum (APC) since the > beginning of the calendar year, here in the Washington-Baltimore area. > I realize I'm giving up roaming capability, since no other North > American market has anybody using GSM. Not true. You can roam in NYC on my carrier, Omnipoint. See your carrier's web site at www.sprintspectrum-apc.com. Warning: if you forget the "-apc" you'll end up at the SprintPCS site, a completely different non-GSM system. Omnipoint seems to be the clear leader in setting up roaming; if I had a 1900 MHz phone, my Omnipoint card would let me roam in DC, in the Carolinas with BellSouth Mobility, in Honolulu, Oklahoma City, Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Las Vegas and Portland with VoiceStream, in SFO/LAX/SanDiego with Pacific Bell, and in Montreal, Ottawa, and Quebec City with Microcell. These are all fully active roaming agreements. See www.omnipoint.com. And as I mentioned, they are the only real GSM carrier so far to have any overseas agreements; yesterday they added Sweden to their list which previously included the UK, the Republic of Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland. > GSM penetrates buildings better, is clearer, and reputedly has never > been cloned. And, in fact, with the SIMcard encryption technology, should never be able to be cloned without a lot more computing than could possibly be economical to bother with. /john ------------------------------ From: dsmith@tiger.co.uk (David Smith) Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming, and North American Mobile Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 03:02:14 GMT Organization: Tiger Co. nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) wrote: > Why didn't the US carriers (inlcluding CDMA) use the same compatible SIM > technology? Would have worked, regardless of air interface! The US GSM-1900 uses the same compatible SIM technology. ------------------------------ From: Karim Alim Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 02:37:58 -0400 Hugh Pritchard wrote in V17, #103: > I realize I'm giving up roaming capability, since no other North > American market has anybody using GSM. That's OK, because Sprint > Spectrum's GSM penetrates buildings better, is clearer, and reputedly > has never been cloned. Actually, as of early April, Omnipoint in the Metropolitan New York area now provides service for Sprint Spectrum-APC users roaming from the Washington-Baltimore area. See http://www.celltalk.com/features/news/97/apr/02:040297002.html for more details including links to coverage maps and pricing. Oh, and I think you are right about GSM being unclonable, but if it ever DOES happen, it will probably be when you're in Manhattan. :^) -k. ------------------------------ From: jsol@eddie.mit.edu (Jon Solomon) Subject: Cellular Problem Dialing More Than 10 Digits Date: Sun, 27 Apr 97 17:51:14 EDT I note that both of the cellular companies here in CT don't let you dial more than 10 or 11 digits to complete a call ... E.g. Dialing 1-800-TERMINIX fails, while 1-800-TERMINI succeeds. I reported it to both Bell Atlantic NYNEX and to SNET Linx. jsol ------------------------------ From: BBethea505@aol.com (Brian Bethea) Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 01:28:18 EDT Subject: NPAs in Jeopardy Situation I recently bcame curious of the number of NPAs currently in jeopardy of exhaust before relief can be provided (split/overlay): This is what I found from cruising Bellcore's website (without ordering IL's at $10 each!) CODE State/Prov. Declaration Relief Plans 310.............CA.................1994........................Split with 562 now in permissive. 617.............MA.................1995........................No relief here until 1998, will split with 781. 415.............CA.................1996........................Split with 650, late summer '97. 619.............CA.................1996........................Split with 760 now in permissive. 412.............PA.................1996........................Was to be overlay (05/97). In review by PUC. 201.............NJ..................1996........................Split with 973 510.............CA.................1996........................Split with 925, 1998. 714.............CA.................1996........................Split with 949, 1998. 212.............NY.................1996........................Overlay (??) in early 1998. New code is 646. 817.............TX..................1996........................Split with 254 & 940, May 1997. 414.............WI.................1996........................Split with 920, early summer '97. 210.............TX..................1996........................Split with 830 & 956, July '97. 508.............MA.................1996.......................Split with 978, early '98. 501.............AR.................1997........................Split with 870 now in permissive. 405.............OK.................1997........................No definites on relief. 215.............PA.................1997........................No definites on relief. 717.............PA.................1997........................No definites on relief. 403.............AB.................1997........................No definites on relief. 770.............GA.................1997........................No definites on relief. 614.............OH.................1997........................Split with 740, late '97. 972.............TX..................1997........................No definites on relief. Just left permissive last week! 816.............MO................1997........................Split with ???, late '97. I find it very interesting that the industry and the local telcos in each of these areas have drug their feet so long in planning. (I realize that state PUCs often muddle the process.) Even so, relief plans should begin as soon as the code level goes above 50%. Also, mandatory dialing should begin as far ahead of the exhaust date as possible, not merely a few days/weeks. Of course, with the use of overlays these problems could be avoided for the most part. I'll not go into that song and dance again. I think there have been a couple split vs. overlay threads recently. Bryan Bethea Market Designation Team Leader Touch 1 Communications ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 16:01:23 +1000 From: fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) Subject: Cell Phone Cancer Study This gets very little coverage in TELECOM Digest, for good reason. Most of the studies are inconclusive. Not all, however. This, I predict, is one of the most significant yet. ----------------------------- Cell phones/cancer connection. by Stewart Fist The Australian newspaper, Tues 29 April 1997 A team of scientists funded by Telstra to investigate claimed links between cellular phones and cancer has turned up probably the most significant finding of an adverse health effects yet. When presented to 'Science' magazine for publication the study was rejected on the grounds that publication "would cause a panic". Three other prominent magazines including 'Nature' also later rejected the report, suggesting that they would not handle such important conclusions without the research being further confirmed. The study looked at 200 mice, half exposed and half not, to pulsed digital phone radiation. The work was conducted at the Royal Adelaide Hospital by Dr Michael Repacholi, Professor Tony Basten, Dr Alan Harris and statistician Val Gebski, and it revealed a highly-significant doubling of cancer rates in the exposed group. The mice were subject to GSM-type pulsed microwaves at a power-density roughly equal to a cell-phone transmitting for two half-hour periods each day; this was pulsed transmission as from a handset, not the steady transmission of a cell-phone tower. A significant increase in B-cell lymphomas was evident early in the experiment, but the incidence continued to rise over the 18 months. The implications of the B-cell (rather than the normal T-cell) lymphomas here, is that B-cell effects are implicated in roughly 85 percent of all cancers. The experiment was conducted as a blind trial, using absolutely identical equipment and conditions for two groups of 100 mice. The only difference between handling the two groups was that the power to one antenna was never switched on. Over the 18 months, the exposed mice had 2.4-times the tumour rate of the unexposed - but this was later corrected downwards to a more confident 2-times claim to remove other possible influences. According to Dr Alan Harris from the Walter and Eliza Institute in Melbourne: "This is important because at present, there was no convincing evidence that radio fields (in contrast to X- and Gamma-rays, ultraviolet and atomic radiation) can directly cause the changes in genes responsible for cancer development." In fact, until late 1996, most governments and all cell-phone companies have been claiming that the safety of their product has been proved - and that the only possible biological effect of radio frequency transmission is localised body heating. The conduct of this experiment actually raises questions more about the potential for cell-phone hanset radiation to effect people nearby (passive exposures) than just the user him/herself. The experiment was conducted in the 'far field', at distances greater from the mice than the cell-phone is normally held from the head. Near-field biological effects in EMF effects are thought to be sustantially different from far-field, although the biomedical implications are not clear. Also, in close proximity, most of the energy transfers from the handset to the head by induction rather than just radiation, and this can raise the energy transfer by a factor of four. The study therefore under-rates the potential power effects on the handset user, while over-rating those for people nearby. The Adelaide study has been held back from publication for over two years while the B-cell implications were checked at a laboratory in Maryland, USA. Under their contract with Telstra, those involved in the study were prohibited from discussing their findings until after publication. Increased tumours began to be recorded after about 9 months. It is important to note that these were transgenic mice, specially bred to be susceptible to cancers of the immune system. However susceptible mice are commonly used in these studies as 'proxies', since cancer-causing effects are believed to be cumulative at the cell level. The total exposure period is very much less than can be expected from human use over a lifetime, so while one of the scientists downplayed the importance, saying, "humans are not rodents" another pointed out that "DNA is DNA". Every attempt appears to have been made to hose down the significance of this report, however the importance of the finding will not be lost on the international scientific community. This research now places Australia at the fore-front of EMF-health research, and it demands a series of follow-up studies to investigate dose-related responses and near-field effects. An expensive video-conference is being mounted on Wednesday by Telstra in Adelaide to officially release the report, with Dr Michael Repacholi speaking from Geneva. He has been prominent crusader on the side of "cell-phones are safe" lobby for many years. However, none of the technical or medical press involved in this debate have been invited to Adelaide conference. The official press release issued by the chairman of the scientific committee, Professor Tony Basten of Sydney University, also leads with gentle fire-extinguisher statement that "In our opinion the findings are valid for this genetically-engineered mouse model, but they must be put in context. Mice and humans absorb energy from these fields differently so we cannot conclude from this single study that humans have an increased risk of cancer from the use of digital mobile phones. More focussed research needs to be done to resolve that issue" I couldn't agree more on the last point, but nothing done in the last few years with the exception of the Drs. Lai-Singh work in Seattle has more obviously established that cell-phone safety has not yet been proved. There has been evidence accumulating over many years that the long-term effects of radio-frequency exposures may have serious consequences for a small percent of the population, but this has been ignored by the industry and by governments. The fact that Prof. Tony Basten concluded his release with the statement "For the time being, at least, I see no scientific reason to stop using my own mobile phone," is largely irrelevant. At his age and in his occupation, the potential dangers from increased phone use are probably minimal. The question is, would he buy his teenage child one? SIDEBAR This report follows two other fierce brush-fire in the cell-phone industry. The first was generated last year when Dr Henry Lai and Dr Singh at Washington State University reported enormous increases in double-strand DNA breaks in rat-brain tissue following microwave exposures of only two hours. The industry largely ignored these findings claiming that the frequencies used were not identical to cell-phones. In addition, the Wireless Technology Research (WTR) group in the USA, which is funded by the cell-phone industry has become embroiled in a number of scandals. The WTR was promoted to the public and to the US Government as being an 'independent' and 'arms-length' body controlling $25 million in research funding. Recent leaked documents show that it has been under the direct control of the industry association, and it has long operated as a PR front. In the last four years it has spent $17 million "without wetting a test-tube, " according to Microwave News editor, Louis Slessin. Following the tobacco industry's problems, the WTR scientists recently went on strike for nearly a year, refusing to perform their contracted research until adequately covered for indemnity against law suits by the cellular phone industry association. Last week, the WTR was finally paid US$938,000 to fund indeminity insurance coverage. The US scientists' sensitivity to this issue follows the filing of thirty-eight cases which are now before the courts over past tobacco-safety studies. Both the tobacco company lawyers and the scientists they funded have been charged as co-conspirators with the Tobacco Institute and the cigarette companies in suppressing evidence and manipulating research results. END ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The sleight of hand comes while you are reading their lips! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Stewart Fist Technical writer and journalist. Homepage:< http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/stewart_fist > Archives of my columns:< http://www.abc.net.au/http/pipe.htm > Development site: Phone:+612 9416 7458 Fax: +612 9416 4582 ------------------------------ From: stevenl@pe.net (Steven Lichter) Subject: Share the Wealth (ya) Date: 26 Apr 1997 13:25:06 -0700 Organization: PE.net - Internet access from the Press-Enterprise Company Here is an 888 number that I got in junk E-mail. I'm sure all of you would like to call it to find out how you can share the wealth. Besure to tell them that your sponser is SH3333777, so that he may get all the credit. Besure to leave all the information requested or he will never know. The number is 888-324-3245. Remember not to abuse that number and you should really call from a pay phone or large PABX. *****LEGAL NOTICE TO ALL BULK E-MAILERS***** NOTICE TO BULK EMAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, 227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. 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 Macintoch computers. ------------------------------ From: asherman@lehman.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Incredible Chutzpah Date: 27 Apr 1997 08:40:34 -0400 Organization: Lehman Brothers, Inc. Did anybody else hear about this? I heard it as one of those whimsical little pieces on the half-hour on NPR's Morning Edition a couple weeks ago. It seems some relatively small LD carrier has applied to do business in Florida under the trade names of "I Don't Care" and "It Doesn't Matter". Presumably, if a subscriber gave either of those answers to a LEC carrier selection request then Scumbag Communications (or whomever) would be that person's PIC. According to the story, the Florida PSC has delayed action on the application while it searches for the statutory authority to say no. [Pause] OK, now that we've had a good laugh, let's get serious! Can you imagine the statue not having the authority to prevent implementation of a deceptive trade practice? I would think this is easy -- compare the consumer's intent in saying "I don't care" to the outcome if these folks prevail. They are not the same, unless to add to the carrier selection script "Do you mean 'I Don't Care' long distance service from Scumbag Communications or do you mean that you don't care who your carrier is?" Anybody heard what the final PSC action was on this? Andy Sherman 3 World Financial Center, NYC, 11th Flr VP, Business Continuity (212) 526-4641 Lehman Brothers Global Unix Support asherman@lehman.com "Never use a scalpel if a machete will do the job." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There have been previous reports a few months ago in this Digest about the company which made up those names, since they have applied in other states as well, where they have had mixed results (turned down in a few, accepted in a couple). PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #104 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Apr 29 04:38:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id EAA10112; Tue, 29 Apr 1997 04:38:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 04:38:16 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199704290838.EAA10112@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #105 TELECOM Digest Tue, 29 Apr 97 04:38:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 105 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Rural Telcos and the Internet (oldbear@arctos.com) Book Review: NetSuccess: How Real Estate Agents Use the Internet (R Slade) Qualcomm Gets OK on Q Phones (Tad Cook) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Greg Monti) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (John B. Hines) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (nwdirect@netcom.com) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Bob Goudreau) Why Both 1+10 and 10 on my CID (Dave Yewell) Original Called Number Delivery on 800 Calls (Bill McMullin) Talk or Drive, But Not Both at Same Time (Witold Dziewaltowski-Gintowt) Re: Incredible Chutzpah (Seymour Dupa) Re: Florida PSC to Revisit 904 Split (Linc Madison) Re: Radio Call-In Contest Regulations (Eric Florack) Manual Conversion (Carl Navarro) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 28 Apr 1997 16:00:19 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Rural Telcos and the Internet I just had a request for some information from some grade school kids working on a school project and was curious about where they were located. I checked the name of their school's internet access provider in the internic and discovered they are in northern Montanta and that their ISP is part of a rural telephone cooperative. From what I could tell from their ISP's web pages, Three Rivers Telephone Cooperative servers about 16,000 subscriber lines. The co-op has been around since 1953 and now serves 26 exchanges -- and offers internet access in all but one of these exchanges at what appears to be competitive rates to those which we find in many more urbanized areas. (They maintain a web site at http://www.3rivers.net which includes some pages about their internet services, a map of their service area, their newsletter, etc.) While rural cooperatives are not that unusual, I have not been sufficiently close to them to know what they have been doing in the area of internet connectivity for their subscribers. If this is typical, I am both pleased for what it portends for rural access to the net -- and deeply disturbed about the whining coming from the Baby Bells who continue to complain about net access being a problem rather than an opportunity. Cheers, The Old Bear ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 11:02:27 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "NetSuccess: How Real Estate Agents Use the Internet" BKNETSUC.RVW 961219 "NetSuccess", Scott Kersnar, 1996, 1-56592-213-1, U$34.95/C$49.95 %A Scott Kersnar skersnar@wco.com %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1996 %G 1-56592-213-1 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$34.95/C$49.95 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 214 %T "NetSuccess: How Real Estate Agents Use the Internet" What the heck, I mean, some of my *relatives* are real estate agents. But, you must admit, this is a pretty specialized interest. When one has been reviewing books for a while, one gets a bit cynical about specialized topics. Not to worry. Kersnar has done an excellent job of presenting the net in a realistic, detailed, and helpful fashion. Although the book does present case studies of realty companies connecting to the net, it doesn't fall into the trap of becoming simply a series of Web site screen shots. (Than which there is nothing more boring.) Email is given primacy--as it should, given that email is the most immediately useful resource. The overview of software tools even includes the all important, but often unmentioned, dialer. Definitely one of the better business-on-the-Internet books. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKNETSUC.RVW 961219 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) ------------------------------ Subject: Qualcomm Gets OK on Q Phones Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 01:11:45 GMT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Published Saturday, April 26, 1997,in the {San Jose Mercury News}. Qualcomm gets OK on `Q' phones as Motorola loses suit Mercury News Wire Services SAN DIEGO -- A federal judge has ruled that Qualcomm Inc. can move ahead with plans to produce palm-sized wireless telephones that rival those offered by Motorola Corp. in a decision that could help drive down prices and expand services for such extremely lightweight, compact devices. The judge Thursday night denied claims by Motorola that San Diego-based Qualcomm copied its designs. Qualcomm officials said Friday that work will resume immediately on its "Q" phones, five-ounce devices that Motorola contended were illegally patterned after its popular StarTAC model. U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones Jr. ruled Thursday that Motorola has "no likelihood of success on the merits of its claims" in its infringement case. Motorola officials said the company has already filed a petition to appeal Jones' decision. The Qualcomm phone, which is expected to cost about $800 when it goes on sale this summer, has a similar size and clamshell shape to the Motorola device, which costs up to $899. The antennas, batteries and keypads also are in the same positions. But there are differences. The StarTAC's "send" and "end" keys are laid out differently. And unlike Motorola, Qualcomm will offer e-mail and other Internet features on its "Q" phones. The San Diego company said it did not intentionally mimic the StarTac, but placement of its features were dictated by function. Jones agreed that the "Q" phone did not infringe on most "points of novelty" attributed to the Motorola model. For instance, the "Q" phone's rectangular screen is similarly located on the StarTAC, but the placement was dictated by the phone's functions rather than industrial theft. But the decision could damage Motorola's bottom line because the StarTac is such an innovative and unusual design, said analyst Bradley Williams of Legg Mason Wood Walker Inc. Qualcomm shares rose $2.13 Friday to $45.13. Motorola shares fell $2.63 to $55.38. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:38:48 -0400 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? On 22 Apr 97, bob.savery@hawgwild.com (Bob Savery) wrote: > Perhaps I'm missing something somewhere. Last time I looked, there were > 890 possible area codes There are about 710 possible area codes in the North American system at it stands, with the 1XX, N11 and N9X combinations excluded. > (Why is 1xx reserved anyway? Because the initial digit would be confused with the "1" which is used to indicate "area code next" in some, but not all, cases. Suppose area code 144 were assigned. So, 144-367-9949 wouild be a legitimate NANP number. Now, a subscriber dials a toll call to 1-443-679-9498 in Maryland. Should the subscriber's central office accept the first ten digits dialed as if they are the whole number and connect him to 144-367-9949? Or should the switch wait for 5 or 6 seconds to see if he dials one more digit, and route it to Maryland? Switching decisions should *never* be based on time-outs on domestic calls. > Why is N9x required > to be reserved for additional digits for local numbers??). So that there is unambigious room to expand the system to four-digit area codes. My area code here in New Jersey is 201. Someday, when all the 3-digit area codes run out, there will need to 4-digit area codes. A specific 4-digit combination has already been reserved to convert 201 to the 4-digit format. It will be 2901. In order for this to work, there can be no 3-digit area codes in which the second digit is a 9 (because that, too, would be ambiguous). Therefore, those with a second digit of 9 are not assignable. This only sets aside 10% of all possible area codes, which is is not a huge deficit. > that 890 times 999 exchange codes times 10000 numbers in each exchange, > there should be 8,891,100,000 possible phone numbers available. Actually, it's 710 area codes times 780 exchange codes times 10,000 numbrs, which is only 5.5 billion possible numbers ... > Yes, I know not all of those can be used (you wouldn't want exchange > numbers starting with 911 for instance), but the vast majority of > those should be good numbers. Yes. But you haven't considered all the things that really affect numbering. In North America, each central office is assigned a "rate area" for determining the mileage of long distance calls in and out. All subscribers to that central office are considered to exist at one single point on the surface of the earth. All mileages for rating calls are measured to and from that point. The billing system used by North American telcos (ranging from the smallest rural co-operative up to the giant local telco GTE, to the long distance giant AT&T) look up the rates for each call by looking only at the first six digits of the called number (after the "1"). Those six digits are the area code and prefix. In the small town of Spearfish, Wyoming, those six digits are 307-643. Without exception, all 307-643 numbers MUST be in the Spearfish central office (or in a rural switching office which is connected to and within about 10 miles of) it. Even if all of the numbers in 307-643 cannot be used because the population of the area is not large enough, those numbers cannot be used anywhere else. This cannot be changed without changing the software at every central office and telephone billing center in North America. All it would take would be time and money. In the US and Canada, there are tens of thousands of towns with populations under a few thousand. In these towns, the 10,000 possible phone numbers in a single prefix may *never* all be used up or assigned. But all 10,000 numbers are assigned to that town (and mileage point) and cannot be used anywhere else. Each prefix runs out of numbers when about 90% of the 10,000 numbers are used. In those cases, a second prefix is overlaid on the town. Each area code runs out of prefixes when about 780 prefixes are used (regardless of how full or emtpy those prefixes are). In those cases, a second area code is added by splitting or overlaying. Another North American rule is that area codes do not cross state lines. So you cannot combine the small populations of Montana and Wyoming into a single area code to save assigning one. Also, each time a new phone company starts up in an area, whether it is a landline company, a new competitor, a cellular or PCS company, it must be assigned a block of numbers, usually 10,000 numbers (one prefix) to begin serving its customers. So, here we are in Spearfish, with maybe 500 access lines connected to the 307-643 central office. And two cellular carriers move in and want blocks of numbers. The A and B carriers have 100 customers each. And they also have one prefix apiece. So the small town has 3 prefixes (30,000 numbers) serving 700 paying customers. Tough. That's just the way it is. > Where am I off in my figuring?? If I'm even halfway close, we couldn't > possibly run out of numbers for a long time, if ever! Let's look at the beginning of 1995. There were about 150 area codes in service then, which was all the possibilities that could exist without the center digit being allowed to expand beyond 0 or 1. Since early 1995, 28 months have passed, and about 60 new area codes have been assigned in North America. That's about two new area codes per month. Let's do the math. We know that there can be about 710 area codes if we exclude the ones of the forms X11, 1XX, 0XX and N9X. How many months' supply do we have until we run out of the 710 possible codes? 710 minus 150 equals 560 codes still unassigned. At two codes per month, the three-digit area code system has 280 months left to live. That's 23.3 years. So, in 23.3 years from January, 1995, give or take 50%, the area code system will need to go to four digits: March, 2018. We're taking bets that it will be sooner than that. > What prompted this was the BellSouth Press release announcing they now > have 6 million access lines in Florida. By my figuring, you could fit 6 > million lines into a single area code. Yes. You absolutely can, if thay are all in big cities in which each prefix uses all 10,000 numbers. > And yet Florida has 10 [area codes] and says they need more??! Don't forget, BellSouth is not the only phone company in Florida. It does not serve the boom-towns of Tampa-St Pete (which are GTE), or Fort Myers Naples (served by Sprint) or Tallahasse (I forget who serves them). There are plenty of other companies serving Florida, too, all of which are outside of the 6 million lines counted by BellSouth. Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: jhines@enteract.com (John B. Hines) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 12:47:03 GMT Organization: The Conspiracy bob.savery@hawgwild.com (Bob Savery) wrote: > Where am I off in my figuring?? If I'm even halfway close, we couldn't > possibly run out of numbers for a long time, if ever! There just isn't > 9 billion ports available in the telephone network! Nor will there be > anytime in the near future! (I don't think??!) The problem is in the way the phone system does phone number routing and billing. This is done by the exchange part of the number, so that in order to establish a Point Of Presence (POP) on the phone network requires an entire exchange, 10,000 numbers at a time. When MFS, TCG and other alternative phone companies want to setup in a new CO, they take phone numbers 10,000 at a time, even if they only have a couple of hundred actually assigned. Even then numbers are often assigned in large blocks within the large blocks for companies, etc. A smarter routing system, similar to what is used for 800 number portablity, would make number allocation more efficent. One thing I would like to see, is a "shadow" overlay area code for large metropolitan areas. This would be a voluntary assigned at the request of the line owner, and would be intended for non-human use numbers like modems, ATM and POS machines. I know the FCC has struck down mandatory overlays, so thats why it would be optional. If I was a tele/data com manager, with lots of machines that used the telephone network to communicate, not having to re-program everything when there were splits in the "human" numbers would be big advantage. It would also be a signal to telemarketers not to call, since there isn't a human to answer. Such numbers would not be listed in the phone book, or directory assistance to simplify things, and discourage human use. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something I have also wondered about is why all the lines in a hunt group on a switchboard (or any multi-line phone for that matter) have to have actual, dialable numbers assigned to them. It seems like a waste of numbers for a switchboard with thirty or forty incoming trunks on it to have a number for each trunk. Usually people just dial into the first line. Couldn't quite a few numbers in each area code be salvaged in that way, by making the back lines in a hunt group just be 'circuits' which were hunted down as needed? Give them non-dialable numbers like 012-3456. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nwdirect@netcom.com Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 15:24:40 GMT For starters many of the numbers that are assigned are not actually used. It is quite inexpensive for a paging company or other entity to take an entire prefix and use just a few numbers in it. That wastes the entire prefix. The phone companies should assign numbers in blocks of 1,000 and once they use those they can have another 1,000. These would be in prefixes already in use. The phone companies can reserve specific prefixes for this purpose if they want to but share them with all similar companies. How can they force the issue? Very simply. Charge the current prices to do it this way and quadruple the price if they want to hog an entire prefix. The problem now is that the telcos are practically giving the prefixes away. I heard that anyone can have an entire prefix for around $10,000 a month, a dollar a number. At those rates it is easy to pay for an entire prefix. The telcos don't really care if they have to keep adding new area codes. It is up to the public to say enough is enough and for the telcos not to issue new area codes until the usage percentage of the numbers they already have is sufficiently high enough. With the proliferation of new phone companies, each taking several prefixes and using just a very small portion of the prefixes assigned to them will just exacerbate the problem. The way we are going now it is quite possible that we could exhaust all the available area codes within the next 11 years. We need a federal law or FCC ruling to stop this insanity before it is too late. * Internet Access Providers - Web Presense Providers - BBSes * * http://www.thedirectory.org/ - largest directory on the web * * tens of thousands of listings - over 7,500 Access Providers * * Telephone Prefix Location Finder - "The BBS Corner" * ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1997 11:52:28 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? bob.savery@hawgwild.com (Bob Savery) wrote: > Perhaps I'm missing something somewhere. Last time I looked, there were > 890 possible area codes Ahh, but you looked a little too far, and counted many more codes than are possible :-) ... Taking your questions in order: > (Why is 1xx reserved anyway? Because direct-dialing 1-1XX-NXX-XXXX would conflict with special service codes that start with "11" (and which are also dialable with the "*" key if you have tone-dialing). For instance, 1167 (or *67) blocks transmission of Caller ID. Likewise, dialing an operator- assisted number as 0-1XX-NXX-XXXX would conflict with international calls, which begin with 011 (direct-dialed) or 01 (operator-assisted). The 00X range is also off-limits, since 1-0XX-NXX-XXXX would conflict with the 10XXX (soon to be 101XXXX) set of carrier-selection codes (e.g., prefix your call with 10288 or 1010288 to choose AT&T as the carrier). > Why is N9x required to be reserved for additional digits for local > numbers??). Umm, because *something* has to be reserved for number expansion, and N9X is as good as anything else? To be more precise, the N9X NPAs are reserved for general "future number expansion". This may include longer local numbers; it may include longer area codes; it may include both. But the NANP Administration would be extremely foolish to paint itself into a corner by using up all the number space with no smooth upgrade path for number space expansion, during which new longer numbers can be phased in and old 10-digit numbers phased out. > If you take that 890 times 999 exchange codes times 10000 numbers in > each exchange, there should be 8,891,100,000 possible phone numbers > available. Yes, I know not all of those can be used (you wouldn't > want exchange numbers starting with 911 for instance), but the vast > majority of those should be good numbers. The actual total, while still a large number, is only about half of what you suppose. First, there aren't 999 possible exchange codes. For reasons similar to the previously-discussed impediments to 0XX and 1XX area codes, 0XX and 1XX exchanges cannot work, unless all 7-digit dialing within the NPA is eliminated. Even then, there are extra complications: some of those numbers have long been used as the billing numbers of non-dialable points; and some telephonic equipment is apparently unable to handle dialing a 10-digit number that has 0 or 1 as its fourth digit. Also, the N11 series of exchanges (and NPAs) is generally unavailable, due to special numbers like 911 (emergency), 411 (directory assistance), 611 (telco repair) and 311 (the proposed new non-emergency police number). There are a few places where some N11 exchanges (such as 811) exist as the prefix for normal 7-digit numbers, and NPAs which have no 7-digit dialing (such as 800, 888 and 900) now also allow N11 exchanges (though even they exclude 911). But in most cases, N11 numbers aren't available, and the number of usable 3-digit prefixes within a given NPA is only 792 (and 799 for non-geographic NPAs such as 800). Second, the area code space is much smaller than 890 codes. As discussed above, 0XX, 1XX and N9X are unavailable. NANPA has also put a few other codes off-limits or reserved them for specific service uses (thanks to Mark Cuccia for providing these details last year). Here's a list; note that "aa" refers to a pair of digits that match each other: N11: barred because N11 special numbers must still be dialable even in areas with 10-digit dialing. 37X: reserved for future (as-yet-uconceived) services that might require an entire block of 10 contiguous NPAs. 96X: reserved for same purpose as 37X 5aa: PCS (expansion of existing NPA 500) 8aa: toll-free (expansion of NPA 800) 456: international inbound 521, 524->529: Mexico Roaming, Temp. 600: Canadian Telex and other data services 700: IC services 710: US GETS (Government Emergency Telephone System) 881, 881: international access to NPAs 800, 888 883, 885, 886, 887, 889: reserved for NDTP (Non Dial Toll Point) relief > Where am I off in my figuring?? If I'm even halfway close, we couldn't > possibly run out of numbers for a long time, if ever! There just isn't > 9 billion ports available in the telephone network! Nor will there be > anytime in the near future! (I don't think??!) > What prompted this was the BellSouth Press release announcing they now > have 6 million access lines in Florida. By my figuring, you could fit 6 > million lines into a single area code. And yet Florida has 10 and says > they need more??! That's an average of 16.65 numbers per line! Even > figuring DID numbers into business trunks, I don't see that many numbers > being used. Even though you are about "halfway close" to the correct number, the thing to keep in mind is that it represents only the maximum *possible* phone numbering space, only reaching that maximum if usage density is 100 percent and there is no wastage. However, until NPA numbers are fully commerically and geographically portable (i.e., until the first six digits of an NXX-NXX-XXXX phone number have no more association with particular telcos or geographic zones), there will continue to be a large amount of wasted number capacity. There is a significant amount of slack capacity at both the NPA and the local exchange level. Even in these days of explosive phone number growth, there are a number of NPAs with a fairly small number of local exchanges, which might never come close to using up the whole NPA. Waste is probably much worse at the local level, since (with a few exceptions) each local central office, even for podunk towns with a few dozen phone lines, uses an entire exchange of 10,000 phone numbers. And in the past few years, exchange density has gotten even lower due to a proliferation of new telcos, such as cellular providers and competitors for local service. The latter are a big source of number usage, since they have been reserving at least one exchange for *every* billing point in their service areas, even when they have few or no customers in those locations yet. Hopefully, local number portability will restrain such profigacy, since it will allow customers to switch to a different local telco without having to change phone numbers. On the other hand, some of the mechanisms being mooted to implement local number portability might make the problem even worse, since they involve mapping "logical" numbers to telco-specific physical numbers. 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: I would think area code 401 serving Rhode Island is mostly wasted. Certainly quite a few exchanges are in use there, but I'll bet there are lots and lots of unused numbers. Ditto 406 for Montana and 208 for Idaho. Is there any reason the entire North American continent has to stay as a group in country code 1? For example, suppose we had country code 12 for the eastern part of the USA, country code 13 for the western part (let the Mississippi River be the dividing point, like it is for the 'K' and 'W' radio stations) and perhaps country code 14 for Canada. Now each 'country' gets to use the entire bunch of area codes internally, and like existing area codes, subscribers would only need to dial 011-12-XXX or 011-13XXX plus seven digits if they were dialing to the other side of the country or to Canada. Admittedly we would have to dial fifteen digits if calling the other side of the USA but only seven or eleven digits for most calls instead of twelve digits everywhere if a four digit area code is imposed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Yewell Subject: Why both 1+10 and 10 on my CID Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 21:54:44 -0700 Organization: Netcom I just received a new CID from BellSouth. There are two buttons to dial long distance based on the number sent: "dial 10 digits" which I assume are the ten digits which CID delivers and "dial 1+10 digits" Isn't all 10 digit dialing in the US "1+10"? Appreciate your info. Dave ------------------------------ From: Bill McMullin Reply-To: bill@interactive.ca Subject: Original Called Number Delivery on 800 Calls Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 23:37:28 -0300 Organization: InfoInterActive Inc. We are trying to determine which, if any, US telcos provide the Original Called Number to the 1-800 network provider. In other words, if a phone is Call Forwarded to a 1-800 number and the termination location has PRI ISDN or SS7 connectivity, does the Original Called Number get delivered when the forwarding station receives calls? In case there is no definitive answer or only some telcos and areas offer the service, we have set up a test 1-800 number. We are looking for US volunteers who subscribe to Call Forwarding on their home phone. For those which want to help you simply need to forward your phone to 1-800-214-4728 then call yourself or have someone call you. Only one test call is necessary and after it is done you can turn off Call Forwarding. Based on the logs we produce we will be able to tell whether or not the Original Called Number is delivered. Thanks in advance to anyone who is willing to help. Regards, Bill McMullin InfoInterActive Inc. Halifax, Nova Scotia Ph: 902-832-1611 Fx: 902-832-1015 ------------------------------ From: Witold Dziewaltowski-Gintowt Subject: Talk or Drive, But Not Both at Same Time Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 18:42:48 -0400 Organization: Cognos Incorporated This could be a first (or at least one of the first few) in legislation related to cellphones and driving: According to latest press reports from Poland the newly adopted Highway Act, a legislation regulating the usage of public highways, PROHIBITS the use of cellular phones (as well as smoking :-)) while driving in populated ("urban" or "residential" might be better translations) areas. Safety appears to have been the deciding factor for adopting the new rules. More on the subject as news rolls in ... Witold Dziewaltowski-Gintowt Software Engineer voice: (613) 738-1338 x. 4664 Cognos Incorporated fax: (613) 228-1448 Ottawa, Ontario mailto: dziewalw@cognos.com CANADA ------------------------------ From: grumpy@en.com (Seymour Dupa) Subject: Re: Incredible Chutzpah Date: 28 Apr 1997 15:15:26 GMT Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc. In comp.dcom.telecom Andy Sherman wrote: > It seems some relatively small LD carrier has applied to do business > in Florida under the trade names of "I Don't Care" and "It Doesn't > Matter". I once head a person shanged his name to "None of the Above". He then ran for political office. On the ballot, his name appeared ... John ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Florida PSC to Revisit 904 Split Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 22:03:58 -0700 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , Tom.Horsley@worldnet. att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) wrote: > Either that, or terrible news coverage of the issues, with reporters > implying that everyone would have to start dialing 10 digits for every > number they ever call. It's really very simple: With an overlay, *no* > number you currently dial will change in the slightest. With a split, > odds are good (and they get better with every split) that some of the > numbers you call will have to change and you will have to dial 10 > instead of 7 digits. So explain again why the PSC thinks a split is > more "convenient"? The reason that the news reporters have been saying that with an overlay you will have to dial 10+ digits for every call is that it is TRUE. In an overlay, 7-digit dialing is prohibited. There are two very strong reasons for this rule: (1) It is very important to force everyone in an overlay to think of their phone number as the full 10-digit number, not just the last 7. The only practical way of doing that is to require them to DIAL all 10. (2) Allowing 7-digit dialing within the same overlay area code gives the incumbent LEC a huge advantage over the entering competitors. For both of those reasons, the FCC has mandated that all overlays must be accompanied by 10-digit (or 11-digit) dialing. So, contrary to your assertion, in an overlay, *EVERY* local number in your own area code will change in the manner you dial it. ** Do not spam e-mail me! ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best-com >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sick of hearing all this crapola about how 'allowing seven digit dialing within same overlay code gives the incumbent LEC a huge advantage ...' That has *never* been demon- strated or proven. Are not the competitor's customers going to be calling one another just as often as the existing LEC's customers call one another (within the same code)? Is not the LEC going to be assigning its own customers to the new overlay code as well? If I am an existing customer of LEC and you choose to go with a competitor and we wish to talk to each other, I'll need to dial your area code as often as you need to dial mine. In the meantime both of us can continue to dial seven digits for many of our calls. Now I have no particular objection to simply dialing ten digits for all calls, and in fact if the entire nation went to a dialing scheme of area code plus seven digits for everything, we would be able to get by with ten digits instead of eleven because there would no longer be any ambiguity about the meaning of the first three digits dialed; they would always be an area code, and as a result no need to pull a one to start with to provide context. What I do object to however is the constant whining and complaining by the competitors, wireless and landline alike, that everything done to them is 'unfair', and that the rest of us must be imposed upon with every change in the technology no matter how inconvenient it is for us to change area codes, etc once a month more or less. In the northwest suburban (Chicago) community of Schaumburg, IL about half the people in town had to get completely new telephone numbers -- all ten digits! -- because they could not be worked conveniently into either 847 or 630 with their existing numbers. In Chicago itself, there might as well be an overlay between 312 and 773; the essence of one is present anyway on the north side boundary line between the two codes as it juts in and out, up and down side streets and between houses on the same block over a range of about a mile along Armitage Avenue. But ask Joe Diddly's phone company and its half-dozen customers to accept a different area code or to share a prefix with P. Yunies phone company and its three customers?? Why god forbid, that would be unfair! It would give LEC an unfair advantage ... or so it is claimed. Only a tiny minority of the existing customers of LEC will ever give any consideration at all to going to a competitor, and if they are saavy enough to know how to do that, then they are saavy enough to know how to dial between area codes and understand the reasoning behind receiving a new number/area code to start with. The burden on this should go to the people who have caused the problem, not all the other subscribers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:44:08 PDT From: Eric Florack Subject: Re: Radio Call-In Contest Regulations John Higdon writes in #97, > scs@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) wrote: >> I've speculated that special contest numbers are >> used which are known to all of the switches in a metropolitan area, so >> that the load of returning busy signals to N-1 callers can be >> distributed among all of the CO's, rather than swamping the one switch >> attached to the contest line (and tying up lots of trunks). > This practice (yes, it did exist -- I even hosted a radio talk show > dedicated to the topic back in the seventies) was known as a "choke > network". A prefix was designated as a "high volume" exchange and all > radio stations using lines for contests and requests were required to > obtain numbers in that special exchange. Stations not served by that > particular central office were required to haul it in via foreign > exchange. In the case of Rochester Tel, they used 222 for this purpose. Since 222 was not serving ANY area in 716, it was a new exchange set up for the purpose and all radio stations air lines were run through it. Thing was that 222 wasn't really an exhange, I don't think, since none of the numbers for any of the dozen or so stations I worked for, ever terminated in 222. Instead, invariably, they'd be terminated in the exhange in service for that area. IE: Downtown Rochster studios would be served by 454 and 232 numbers, studios in Brighton 442/461, and so on. I've always assumed it was some kind of map routing, which would send any 222 calls to the Stone Street site (our biggest telco operation) and then back out to whatever the real number was from there, on a call-forward basis. Always seemed to me a bit of a waste of switch power. -----&<----snip-------- > I speak of all this in the past tense because in the era of SS7 and > intelligent routing networks, trunk management can be done on the > fly. A virtual choke network can be created instantly. As a result, > the old choke exchange has fallen into disuse. Since Stone street was all ESS by the time this was in place, in our case, it was a simple proceedure to simply add the 222 routings to the xbar exchanges. It's a system still in use today, even with all the switches now being ESS. Why bother to change it, I guess... =0= There is no such thing as 'shades of grey', no 'grey areas', only black and white spots, some of which are very small. If you see grey, you're not getting close enough to what you're looking at to know it's true nature.Every grey area is merely a number of componant questions you're not close enough to see. ____________________________ __________________________________ /Eric Florack, SysOp of the /\ /Internet:eflorack@servtech.com /\ / FREE FILE FARM BBS / /\ / or eric_florack@xn.xerox.com _/ /\ /716-352-6544 or 352-1629 / \/ / 'A day without Clinton is like / \/ /GT Network 041/003,041/007 /\ / a day without hemorrhoids' / /___________________________/ / /_________________________________/ / \___________________________\/ \_________________________________\/ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ------------------------------ From: Cnavarro@wcnet.org (Carl Navarro) Subject: Manual Conversion Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 11:23:42 GMT > Ameritech will need to keep some Centel employees on hand to operate > the nonstandard (from Ameritech's perspective) switches! I wonder if ITT made any of those switches. It had a manufacturing plant right in the heart of Centel territory in Des Plaines. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > It seems to me also that Centel was the last part of the old area > 312 to be dialable from anywhere else in the area. They had dial > phones also, it is just that they were not connected with Bell for > dialing purposes. We could dial everywhere in Chicago as of 1951 > and the final manual office cutover, but for a few years after Maybe the North Side had no manual exchanges, but not so on the South Side! My parents moved to the PROspect exchange in 1952. I distinctly remember common battery phones (we still had a dial) until sometime in 1955. It seems to me than my friend (ABerdeen 4-0967) had common battery too. Two years ago, when my father passed away, we still had a WECO phone with the old dial showing PROspect 3549 as the telephone number :). Carl Navarro [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I beg your pardon but I am certain that the last manual office in Chicago was cut in 1951 on the north side. The office was called 'Avenue' (as in 283) and it served (still serves) the area around Ohare Airport. The dial conversion started here in 1939 but was suspended about half way done in 1942 when Western Electric was nationalized by the federal government for the war effort. When WECO was given back to AT&T in 1946 and was able once again to resume production for civilian use, Illinois Bell was able to resume manual --> dial conversion. During 1943-45 the telephone company went around to people who had extension phones in their house and asked them to give up their extension phone so that telco could install that instrument in a residence where the people had no phone at all; they had to do this because phone instruments were in very short supply while WECO was doing war production. All during the last half of the 1940's the telephone operators were very discontented. Rumors were rampant that when conversion to automatic dialing was completed, 'the company was going to fire all the operators'; there would no longer be any need for them. Within about six months of the Avenue CO getting cut, Ohare Airport (then known as Orchard Field) opened; despite being dial, Avenue CO had about twice as many operators as before. As an aside, for those of you who wonder how Ohare got the aviation location abbreviation 'ORD' it goes back to when it was called Orchard ... You are correct that PROspect was one of the last to be cut also, but it had to be prior to 1955 by at least a few years. Some phones had dials on them for a year or more prior to the dials being used for anything. While one group of people were converting the offices, another group were going door to door mounting dials on existing dial-less manual instruments. After installing the dial, they put a little sticker on the phone saying 'dial will not be in service until 2:00 AM Saturday, (date) ... until that time do not use the dial, simply lift the receiver and speak to the operator as in the past.' And sure enough, 2:00 AM on the Saturday morning stated, the operator disappeared and dial tone took her place. I remember the cut in Whiting, Indiana when I was around 11-12 years old. Wanting to see how it would work, I stayed awake and deliberatly made some calls both ways. About 1:58 AM I asked the operator for 1234, which was the recorded message line at the Hoosier Theatre giving movie schedules. I asked again at 1:59 AM and got it a second time. At 2:00 AM I lifted the receiver a third time and got nothing. At 2:01 I lifted the receiver and got dial tone, and dialed 659-1234 to hear the message. I probably was the first user of the automated system in Whiting. But a friend of mine who tested it from the Chicago side said the results were somewhat different. Our house in Chicago had had dial service for a few years, and to call Whiting (where my grandparents lived) it was necessary from Chicago to dial '911' and then sit there and wait in dead silence for anywhere from ten to twenty or so seconds until an operator answered saying 'Whiting!' and then passing the desired number to her. He said he tried dialing 659-xxxx starting the day before (Friday) and a strange thing would happen. It would ring, the party in Whiting would answer the phone, but within a couple seconds the Whiting operator would go on the line thinking her subscriber had gone off hook (which he had). The operator was expecting to get a call from her subscriber. Apparently the dial system was wired and in place but the manual switchboards were not yet disconnected. Oddly enough, and as just a bit of historical trivia to close this issue of the Digest, the Amoco Oil Company (then called Standard Oil) had -- still has -- their major refinery facility in Whiting and they had a dial PBX for several years before the town of Whiting had dial service overall. If you are used to picking up an extension to dial 9 and get a new dial tone, imagine dialing 9 on your PBX extension, hearing a click and waiting until an operator responded asking 'number please' ... on the other hand, Amoco PBX users could dial the '8 level' and get dial tone from the Chicago FX lines, or they could dial '7' and get dial tone from the 'StanoTel' national phone network Amoco operated. But dial 9 to make a local call and you waited until an operator came on to ask 'number please'. For incoming calls, officially the lead number on the PBX was given as (Whiting) 2111 (they had about ten or fifteen lines in a hunt group, even in the manual days) but most people just asked the operator for 'the refinery ...' Amoco (as Standard Oil) *was* the telephone company in Whiting in the very early years, from about 1890 to 1900. The reason the extreme northwest corner of Indiana was always *Illinois* Bell rather than Indiana Bell was just a quirk of history also. In the early days, the predecessor to Illinois Bell was a company called Chicago Telephone Company; all the industrial heavyweights of those days -- i.e. John Rockefeller, William Gary of US Steel, others, all had their offices in Chicago but their refineries, foundries, mills and other plants on the southern shore of Lake Michigan. They all wanted the new inven- tion in their offices of course, and when they found out they could use the phone to stay in touch with their plant superintendents over in Indiana -- provided someone installed lines 'that far away' -- they were more than happy to make the capital investment needed. Mr. Gary saw to it that wires were strung to 'his' town of Gary, Indiana and JDR happily paid to string a wire from his office to that of his refinery superintendent in Whiting. The Chicago Telephone Company said thank you very much (big smile no doubt) and with circuits in place, the rest was easy. When AT&T made a big power play in the early 1920's and was gobbling up lots of telcos they got Chicago in the process, along with all of Chicago Tel's customer base, central offices, etc. That included Whiting/Hammond/Gary/East Chicago, Indiana, with original compliments to the industrialists who made it possible for Chicago Tel thirty years earlier. See you tomorrow! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #105 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 1 08:23:27 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA03567; Thu, 1 May 1997 08:23:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:23:27 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705011223.IAA03567@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #106 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 May 97 08:23:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 106 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (John Rice) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (nwdirect@netcom.com) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Brian Wohlgemuth) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Steve Ligett) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Stanley Cline) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (John Dearing) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (John R. Levine) Re: Where Are the Numbers? (Greg Monti) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: fgoldstein@bbn.|nospam.|com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Date: 30 Apr 1997 15:58:25 GMT Organization: BBN Corp. In article , nwdirect@netcom.com says ... > How can they force the issue? Very simply. Charge the current prices > to do it this way and quadruple the price if they want to hog an > entire prefix. The problem now is that the telcos are practically > giving the prefixes away. I heard that anyone can have an entire > prefix for around $10,000 a month, a dollar a number. At those rates > it is easy to pay for an entire prefix. You overestimate the price. NYNEX/MA used to charge $29/month per hundred numbers. Now it's $1/month, or $100/month for an entire prefix! Don't ask me why or whose idea that was. However, you don't have to get numbers from them; any certificated CLEC can order up prefices too, as can Radio Common Carriers (pagers, cellphones, etc.). > With the proliferation of new phone companies, each taking several > prefixes and using just a very small portion of the prefixes assigned > to them will just exacerbate the problem. The way we are going now it > is quite possible that we could exhaust all the available area codes > within the next 11 years. We need a federal law or FCC ruling to stop > this insanity before it is too late. The current system is wasteful because it requires a separate prefix for each carrier in each exchange area (rate center). This could be fixed by allowing *shared* prefix codes, wherein each block-of-1000 numbers could be assigned to a different CLEC. This would require an upgrade of tandem-switch (and probably some local CO) software, but wouldn't generally affect billing. A much worse proposal was to have each CLEC split one prefix among multiple exchanges; that would affect billing software EVERYWHERE. Related: The whole "overlay" "fairness" thing is temporary: With number portability, a CLEC's clients could take their "Bell" numbers to the CLEC switch. So 7-digit dialing in an overlay area would be nondiscriminatory; the "overlay" NPA would be hidden. Of course the CLECs would need to be able to get their non-bulk-number subscribers some numbers in the old NPA, but some of these could be reserved for them. I therefore think the FCC screwed up this one, applying a 1997 rule to the long term. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein"at"bbn.com BBN Corp., Cambridge MA USA +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: rice@SPAMBLOCKR.ttd.teradyne.com (John Rice) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 19:16:04 GMT Organization: Teradyne Telecommunications > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something I have also wondered about is > why all the lines in a hunt group on a switchboard (or any multi-line > phone for that matter) have to have actual, dialable numbers assigned > to them. It seems like a waste of numbers for a switchboard with > thirty or forty incoming trunks on it to have a number for each trunk. > Usually people just dial into the first line. Couldn't quite a few > numbers in each area code be salvaged in that way, by making the back > lines in a hunt group just be 'circuits' which were hunted down as > needed? Give them non-dialable numbers like 012-3456. PAT] They don't. Most of the newer digital switches allow rotaries to have only a pilot number. I've run into this in GTD-5s and others. You'll see evidence of this on Caller-Id, sometimes. However, some telcos assign discrete numbers to all lines of the rotary, anyway, to facilitate testing when line problems are reported, and to use for automated line testing equipment. ------------------------------ From: nwdirect@netcom.com Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 21:11:19 GMT Greg Monti (gmonti@mindspring.com) wrote: > Also, each time a new phone company starts up in an area, whether it > is a landline company, a new competitor, a cellular or PCS company, it > must be assigned a block of numbers, usually 10,000 numbers (one > prefix) to begin serving its customers. So, here we are in Spearfish, > with maybe 500 access lines connected to the 307-643 central office. > And two cellular carriers move in and want blocks of numbers. The A > and B carriers have 100 customers each. And they also have one prefix > apiece. So the small town has 3 prefixes (30,000 numbers) serving 700 > paying customers. Tough. That's just the way it is. Why can't they just be given 1,000 numbers and not necessarily in a block? With computers these days a company can easily keep track of their number inventory. There is no need for them to have a contiguous block. With the crisis we have today we need to change some of our thinking and the way we do things. A town with one prefix and 500 customers should NEVER get another prefix, never ever, unless that prefix has no more usable numbers. When we stop wasting what we have the problem will resolve itself. >> And yet Florida has 10 [area codes] and says they need more??! > Don't forget, BellSouth is not the only phone company in Florida. It > does not serve the boom-towns of Tampa-St Pete (which are GTE), or > Fort Myers Naples (served by Sprint) or Tallahasse (I forget who > serves them). There are plenty of other companies serving Florida, > too, all of which are outside of the 6 million lines counted by > BellSouth. Tallahassee is served by GTE. But it doesn't matter which company serves a particular rate area if there is only one. The problem is when there is more than one. Then the waste begins. Let us take another scenario. In large metro areas it is expected that more than 100 companies will set up to compete. That is at least 100 new prefixes under the current lunacy. Since each metro area generally has more than one rate area, they will need one prefix for each rate area. If they have six or more rate areas one or more splits are automatic. Here is the killer though: Usage is NOT increasing at all (or only a little). Waste IS! Is anyone in the industry awake? I think not! Having one split now and another one in three years is not necessary, period. * Internet Access Providers - Web Presense Providers - BBSes * * http://www.thedirectory.org/ - largest directory on the web * * tens of thousands of listings - over 7,500 Access Providers * * Telephone Prefix Locations - "The BBS Corner" - Web Banner Creation * ------------------------------ From: kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Date: 30 Apr 1997 15:57:37 -0400 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. In article , Telecom Moderator wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would think area code 401 serving > Rhode Island is mostly wasted. Certainly quite a few exchanges are > in use there, but I'll bet there are lots and lots of unused numbers. > Ditto 406 for Montana and 208 for Idaho. Is there any reason the > entire North American continent has to stay as a group in country > code 1? In reality 401 is filling up nicely with enough space for future expansion. By your reasoning you'd give away what capacity we have left and then when we NEED it, we're screwed. I do agree with loaning some of 401 to the southeast part of MA though. Hell, we just ought to annex the Attleboro's. Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com Boston has the combat zone, Providence *IS* an erogenous zone. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 97 10:54:16 EST From: Brian Wohlgemuth Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something I have also wondered about is > why all the lines in a hunt group on a switchboard (or any multi-line > phone for that matter) have to have actual, dialable numbers assigned > to them.] One reason why telcos assign TN's to every line in a Hunt Group is for billing purposes. If "Customer A" has 10 lines in hunt coming into his office, he might use the last few lines to make outgoing calls, and therefore, billing would need to be assigned to those TN's. On a PBX, however, TN's are assigned in the CO to ring through on each of the trunks to the customers premises. The TN's reside in the software, and are dedicated to the customers PBX. Some of these PBX's buy groups of up to 10,000 numbers, but rarely use more than 30%-50% of them. Brian Wohlgemuth brian.wohlgemuth@telops.gte.com Business Sales Consultant GTE Telephone Operations ------------------------------ From: steve.ligett@Dartmouth.EDU (Steve Ligett) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Date: 30 Apr 1997 15:33:42 GMT Organization: steve.ligett@dartmouth.edu > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something I have also wondered about is > why all the lines in a hunt group on a switchboard (or any multi-line > phone for that matter) have to have actual, dialable numbers assigned > to them. It seems like a waste of numbers for a switchboard with > thirty or forty incoming trunks on it to have a number for each trunk. > Usually people just dial into the first line. Couldn't quite a few > numbers in each area code be salvaged in that way, by making the back > lines in a hunt group just be 'circuits' which were hunted down as > needed? Give them non-dialable numbers like 012-3456. PAT] We have a hunt group of 150 modems. We "publish" three numbers in that hunt group for users to use. However, at about 4 a.m. each day, we have a computer dial each of the 150 lines as part of our maintenance procedures. If modems, etc., never failed, we wouldn't need those phone numbers (and my life would be much simpler). ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 19:34:12 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com On Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:38:48 -0400, in comp.dcom.telecom Greg Monti wrote: > Without exception, all 307-643 numbers MUST be in the Spearfish > central office (or in a rural switching office which is connected to This isn't always true. I've seen (usually *adjacent*) COs share the same NXX -- for example, town A gets NXX-[1000 to 4999] and B gets NXX-[5000 to 99999]. > and within about 10 miles of) it. Even if all of the numbers in > 307-643 cannot be used because the population of the area is not large > enough, those numbers cannot be used anywhere else. This cannot be If the ratecenters are adjacent or have become remotes of another CO, I don't see any reason why NXX-sharing could not be done. In fact, in Ringgold, GA which had three NXXs serving different areas of the Ringgold Telephone service area, after the three small COs wer cut over to a single DMS-100, the same three NXXs now can serve *anywhere* in the Ringgold Telephone area -- all calls are rated/routed from the location of the DMS, not the old COs and now remotes! > Also, each time a new phone company starts up in an area, whether it > is a landline company, a new competitor, a cellular or PCS company, it > must be assigned a block of numbers, usually 10,000 numbers (one Wireless carriers don't always get a whole NXX in less populated areas -- they often get a block of numbers in an existing NXX. For example: Cellular carrier wants to serve Copper Basin, TN (there is no B-side service there.) They wouldn't have to get a whole new NXX; they could simply get a block of numbers in 423-496 [or 706-492 or 704-494 which are also local and inside any cellular coverage] (assuming a contiguous block were available, of course.) In general, cellular numbers act like RCF lines or PBX DIDs, in that calls to those numbers *forward* to a port on the wireless MTSO which may be 200 miles away! > Fort Myers Naples (served by Sprint) or Tallahasse (I forget who > serves them). There are plenty of other companies serving Florida, Sprint serves the entire Tallahassee LATA. > too, all of which are outside of the 6 million lines counted by > BellSouth. I'm sure BellSouth didn't count all the NXXs used by CLECs (Intermedia, MFS, etc.), wireless carriers (BellSouth *Mobility*, ATTWS, GTE Mobilnet, 360, US Cellular, Palmer, etc.), paging companies, the BellSouth-reserved 780/203/930* NXXs, and the like. (*780=BellSouth internal, 203=ZipConnect, 930=UniServ) The biggest number-wasters -- without a doubt -- are paging companies and CLECs. Not all of them -- just some of them. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! CLLI MRTTGAMA42G NPA 770 ** scline(at)mindspring.com mailto:roamer1(at)pobox.com ** http://www.pobox.com/~roamer1/ From/Reply-To may be changed -- NO SPAM! http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ ------------------------------ From: jdearing@netaxs.com (John Dearing) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Date: 1 May 1997 02:08:22 GMT Organization: Philadelphia's Complete Internet Provider Our esteemed Moderator opined: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something I have also wondered about is > why all the lines in a hunt group on a switchboard (or any multi-line > phone for that matter) have to have actual, dialable numbers assigned > to them. It seems like a waste of numbers for a switchboard with > thirty or forty incoming trunks on it to have a number for each trunk. > Usually people just dial into the first line. Couldn't quite a few > numbers in each area code be salvaged in that way, by making the back > lines in a hunt group just be 'circuits' which were hunted down as > needed? Give them non-dialable numbers like 012-3456. PAT] I believe what you are talking about are called "Coded Terminals". You have a single published number say 222-1234 which has multiple "terminals" and can accept as many incoming (or outgoing) calls as there are terminals. It's frequently used for Telethon-like applications where you have a bunch of people all calling the same number. In a similar vein, I have also wondered why each outgoing trunk attached to a PBX almost always has an individual phone number. I have seen a (very) few sites that had just a single number for the outbound trunks with each trunk identified with a "terminal" number, ter-1 ter-2, etc. In these cases nobody is going to be calling these numbers anyway, they're just for outgoing calls and usually aren't connected to equipment that is expecting an incoming call anyway. Just think of all the thousands and thousands of numbers that could be recouped. 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) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is true as some writers have pointed out that the 'back lines' occassionally need to be addressed directly for trouble testing purposes, etc however this testing can also be done with a 'line simulator' type device. You plug in the line in question to this device and can ring it and do everything a 'true' incoming call can do. One thing telco might consider is having a surcharge for multiple lines in a hunt group which require actual numbers to be assigned. When new service is installed, telco could offer some discount if 'actual telephone numbers do not need to be assigned to the hunt lines'. It would be a decision by the customer. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 97 16:09 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > prefix) to begin serving its customers. So, here we are in Spearfish, > with maybe 500 access lines connected to the 307-643 central office. > And two cellular carriers move in and want blocks of numbers. The A > and B carriers have 100 customers each. And they also have one prefix > apiece. So the small town has 3 prefixes (30,000 numbers) serving 700 > paying customers. Tough. That's just the way it is. Actually, most cellular carriers hook up to the network as PBXes, not as central offices, so cell carriers can and do use blocks of numbers from regular exchanges. My cell number here is in 607-279, an Ithaca landline exchange, and when I had a Vermont cellular number, it was in 802-296, a White River Junction landline prefix. This caused some trouble setting up my long distance service, since at the IXC I chose, the cellular department sent me to the landline department, and vice versa. (Solution: pick another IXC with more clues and lower rates.) CAPs are indeed gobbling separate prefixes, since their switches are all set up to be peers with the incumbent telco's switches. I've heard a proposal to modify phone routing in dense areas so the call can be routed by seven digits rather than six, e.g. 555-1XXX could be MCI, 555-2XXX could be AT&T, and 555-3XXX could be MFS, all at the same billing point so it wouldn't break the billing software, and only relatively nearby switches and tandems that routed to that prefix would have to know to do something strange. It probably won't happen, since it's not all that much easier than full portability which is already mandated. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 23:59:17 -0400 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Re: Where Are the Numbers? At 04:09 PM 4/30/97 EDT, John R. Levine wrote: > Actually, most cellular carriers hook up to the network as PBXes, not > as central offices, so cell carriers can and do use blocks of numbers > from regular exchanges. I guess I exaggerated a little on the Spearfish, Wyoming example. In smaller towns, cellular often shares a block of numbers with the landline carrier. In any place with significant population, those blocks are 10,000 numbers (whole prefixes). > CAPs are indeed gobbling separate prefixes, since their switches are all > set up to be peers with the incumbent telco's switches. I think ultimatly, cellular and beeper companies will also want their switches to be peers, not subordinate to landline switches. In larger cities, I assume they already are. > I've heard a proposal to modify phone routing in dense areas so the > call can be routed by 7 digits rather than six, e.g. 555-1XXX could be > MCI, 555-2XXX could be AT&T, and 555-3XXX could be MFS, all at the > same billing point so it wouldn't break the billing software, and only > relatively nearby switches and tandems that routed to that prefix > would have to know to do something strange. > It probably won't happen, since it's not all that much easier than > full portability which is already mandated. Hmmm. Thanks for the update. Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #106 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 1 09:09:15 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA06631; Thu, 1 May 1997 09:09:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 09:09:15 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705011309.JAA06631@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #107 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 May 97 09:09:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 107 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson EBS Problems? (Mark J. Cuccia) Utah Delays 801 Relief Three Months (John Cropper) Re: Why both 1+10 and 10 on my CID (Michael J. Tardiff) Re: Why both 1+10 and 10 on my CID (Jeff Hollingsworth) Weird Line Operation - MTU? (Jim Wall) U S WEST's National Directory Assistance (Jim Jacobs) Re: Florida PSC to Revisit 904 Split (Linc Madison) Re: Florida PSC to Revisit 904 Split (David W. Tamkin) UCLA Short Course on "Commercial Satellite Communications" (Bill Goodin) UCLA Short Course on "Digital Signal Processing" (Bill Goodin) PROspect 3549 (Carl Navarro) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 30 Apr 1997 13:12:01 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: EBS Problems? The EBS (Emergency Broadcasting System) has been going through enhancements over the past few years, as I've read in various broadcast communications engineering and industry journals. From what I understand, there is supposed to be a silent 'digital' alerting tone, which will replace the _LOUD_ two-tone (analog) alerting signal that we've heard for a few decades. (I seem to recall reading that originally, the analog alerting tone was a single frequency). One weekday afternoon about a week or two ago, I was listening to WBYU-AM/1450, a station that airs nostalgic music from the 1930's through the 1960's. Most of the time, they carry a satellite fed service from ABC-Radio in Dallas TX, called the "Satellite Music/News Networks", with the particular satellite music format called "Stardust". The network itself airs news from ABC's American Direction Radio Network. At approximately 2:55pm Central Time, the music feed went 'dead', and I heard several _LOUD_ pulses of multiple frequencies. Then I heard the 'standard' EBS dual-frequency alerting signal. I then heard a voice which sounded like a telephone or two-way radio stating "EBS Test for WLS Radio Chicago. Come in, WLS. Hello, WLS?" The entire 'interruption' into the satellite music feed from Dallas ran about five minutes. WLS Radio (as Pat knows) is owned and operated by ABC Radio. I had thought that something went astray in ABC Radio's Satellite automation. (Pat, since WLS is currently a news/talk format, rather than the top-40 music format that it was in the late 1960's though the 1980's(?), do they carry ABC's Paul Harvey again?) A few days after this incident, I heard on Charles Osgood's feature on the CBS Radio Network that the enhanced EBS had a failure the other day, with a closed-circuit test for a particular Chicago radio station being heard all over the country over a broadcast radio network. A few days after that, while listening to Rush Limbaugh on WWL-AM/870, I heard the very SAME pulses of _LOUD_ multiple frequencies. However, I didn't hear any 'standard' EBS tone nor a request for WABC or WLS to 'come-in'. Limbaugh's three-hour radio talkshow is produced by EFM/EIB, although it is distributed over ABC Radio's satellite service. On Tuesday 29 April, while listening to G. Gordon Liddy's national talkshow on WTIX-AM/690, I again heard these same several pulses of _LOUD_ multiple frequencies for a few seconds. Liddy's broadcast is satellite distributed by Infinity/Westwood. Westwood also owns the Mutual Broadcasting System and the NBC Radio Network. Infinity and Westinghouse have some form of merger or association which was announced last year. Westinghouse owns or manages the CBS Radio Network, and I've recently been hearing Liddy mention that his program is on the Columbia Broadcasting System. BTW, CBS Radio's webpage (http://www.cbsradio.com) displays the logo currently used by Westwood/Mutual, in addition to the CBS 'eye' logo (the 'eye' was _NOT_ the logo of CBS Radio back in 70's, but rather a series of 'radiowaves'). Has anyone else been recently hearing these EBS tone-burst signals on local or national radio or television? One would think that these tones wouldn't be audible if the new enhanced system was supposed to be 'fully digital'. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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: John Cropper Subject: Utah Delays 801 Relief Three Months Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 20:02:32 -0400 Organization: lincs.net Reply-To: jcropper@NOSPAM.lincs.net Another state has put NPA relief on hold, this time over concerns by the NANC with regards to inequities in relief duration as a direct result of the 801/435 split. As originally proposed, the split would separate the Wasatch front (801) from the rest of the state (435). 801 would last until 2004, while 435 would last until 2024. NANC guidelines set forth in February 1997 state that a difference of no greater than fifteen years exist in a split-relief situation. In a filing April 16th, Utah regulators decided to DELAY relief of 801 for three months, while they sought a variance from the NANC, permitting the split to proceed as originally approved. This would push permissive dialing back to September 22nd, 1997. No reference was made to changing mandatory dialing, originally scheduled as January 18th, 1998, and it is not known at this time whether this will also change. Refer to http://web.state.ut.us/bbs/PSC/DL05/11146P.WPD on the Utah web server for full details. Please note that you will need WP 5.1 to read it (or a compatible converter). John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 Legacy IS, Networking & Comm. Solutions 609.637.9434 P.O. Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 Unsolicited commercial e-mail is subject mailto:jcropper@lincs.net to a fee as outlined in the agreement at http://www.lincs.net/ http://www.lincs.net/spamoff.htm ------------------------------ From: mjt@halcyon.com (Michael J. Tardiff) Subject: Re: Why both 1+10 and 10 on my CID Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 13:41:37 -0700 Organization: Western Star Internet Consulting In article , Dave Yewell wrote: > I just received a new CID from BellSouth. There are two buttons to dial > long distance based on the number sent: > "dial 10 digits" which I assume are the ten digits which CID delivers > and "dial 1+10 digits" > Isn't all 10 digit dialing in the US "1+10"? Not by a long shot. Some localities have had 10-number (no 1) dialing for year. Here in the greater Seattle area, Sunday began our permissive period as we split 206 into three pieces, and 253 and 425. We've had to dial 11 digits (1+10) for all toll calls for some time; with the split, we still dial 11 digits for toll calls, but now need to dial 10 digits for any call that crosses an area-code boundary. So the rule ends up being "dial 10 for any call, dial 11 if it's a toll call." In what I think was a bad-for-educational-purposes move, U S WEST chose to still allow seven-digit dialing for local calls within an area code. I think that gives people too many confusing options, but no one asked me. At least they allowed 10-digit dialing for local calls so that the above-stated rule works. Cheers, Michael J. Tardiff mjt@westernstar.com Western Star Internet Consulting http://www.westernstar.com Seattle, Washington USA 1 206 528.0388 - Internet Strategy, Connectivity, Web Marketing, Public Speaking - ------------------------------ From: hollings@cs.umd.edu (Jeff Hollingsworth) Subject: Re: Why Both 1+10 and 10 on my CID Date: 30 Apr 1997 00:13:10 -0400 Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 In article Dave Yewell writes: > "dial 10 digits" which I assume are the ten digits which CID delivers > and "dial 1+10 digits" > Isn't all 10 digit dialing in the US "1+10"? As of Thursday most of the state of Maryland will be 10 digit dialing for *all* local calls and 1+10 digit dialing for toll. Seven digit dialing will no longer be permitted due to the pending start of area code overlays. I assume that this box is designed with this feature so it will work in MD too. A side note, Bell Atlantic has been running a big media blitz to prepare for this. We have been hearing lots of stories and reminders about the need to reprogram (or upgrade) everything from FAX machines to emergency phones in elevators. Apparently (according the the Washington Post) Bell Atlantic is eager for a smooth transition since they want to do overlays in 703 (VA) soon. Both areas are part of the DC Metro area and bad press from the 301/410 conversion could doom overlays in 703. Jeff Hollingsworth Work: (301) 405-2708 Internet: hollings@cs.umd.edu FAX: (301) 405-6707 WWW: http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hollings Home: (301) 649-5829 ------------------------------ From: Jim Wall Subject: Weird Line Operation - MTU? Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:34:59 -0700 Organization: SoloPoint, Inc. The other day I ran across a phone line whose onhook voltage was 10v (and it would spike up to 40V every second to two seconds). The phone line worked fine with normal phones but had problems with some more esoteric phone products. At the phone junction box (Pacific Bell land) there was a encapsulated plastic module that had two screw lugs and a earth ground connection. The two screw lugs were tied across tip and ring. If the line were operating correctly I would have said this was some variation of a surge protector. When I took this thing out the line began operating fine with the inhook voltage now a constant 40V. Is this module a Maintenence Termination Unit (MTU)? What is this supposed to accomplish? Now this house was in the middle of nowhere, so are these only installed an really isolated areas? In other words, can anyone give me a brain dump on this subject? It would be greatly appreciated. If I get mail responses, I'll summarize for the net. Thanks, Jim Wall ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:06:45 -0400 From: Jim Jacobs Subject: U S WEST's National Directory Assistance Wednesday April 30 7:08 PM EDT Company Press Release Source: U S WEST Communications Group U S WEST Reports Enormous Demand in Colorado for its New National Directory Assistance Service Operators Currently Fielding More Than a Thousand Calls an Hour DENVER, April 30 /PRNewswire/ -- Demand for U S WEST's new National Directory Assistance service exceeded company projections by more than 400 percent during its first two days of availability. The new service allows people to call a local number -- 1+411 -- to obtain telephone listings from around the country -- all without having to look up area codes and make multiple phone calls. On Tuesday, operators fielded almost 4,000 calls. On day two, teams fielded more than 6,000 calls during the six hour morning shift from 6 a.m. through noon. The service was introduced Tuesday morning to callers in Colorado's 719 area code, and later Tuesday evening to callers in Denver and the rest of the state. ``The response to our National Directory Assistance trial so far is exceeding our wildest expectations,'' said Matthew Peterson, U S WEST manager for National Directory Assistance. ``What's even more encouraging is that reliability for the service is tracking very high.'' To date, operators successfully located listings for customers more than 80 percent of the time. In those cases where listings are not located, most often the numbers are unlisted. ``We're off to a good start and committed to keeping the quality of the service very high,'' said Peterson. ``Calls are being answered at a rate faster than we projected and it's taking less time than expected to successfully complete customer requests for listings.'' The company began a 90-day trial of the service in Colorado after receiving approval from the Colorado Public Utilities Commission. Initially, calls are being handled by staff at the U S WEST Directory Assistance Center in Waterloo, Iowa. This summer, the company plans to expand its Colorado Springs facility to handle the directory assistance calls. U S WEST expects to hire more than 200 people to staff the facility. U S WEST's new National Directory Assistance employs first-of-its-kind technology and search processes to ensure speed and accuracy of service. U S WEST is only the second regional Bell phone company, after Ameritech, to offer a National Directory Assistance service within its territory. With the new service, U S WEST callers in Colorado are able to obtain either local, in-state, or out-of-state listings, with significant cost savings. A call to U S WEST National Directory Assistance costs 85 cents for up to two numbers. Multiple listings can be requested during a single call, and listings can be from different cities and states. Competitive providers typically charge 95 cents or more per call -- and requests for listings from different cities and states require that customers spend additional money and make multiple phone calls. The new system has been designed for ease of use and convenience. Customers simply respond to a voice prompt and need only know the name, city and state of the person, business, or government agency they're seeking. The system -- Automated Directory Assistance Service (ADAS) -- which U S WEST has obtained from Northern Telecom -- automatically routes inquiries either to a local directory assistance operator or to the national bureau, depending upon the request. With the system, operators also hear the customer request -- while listings for particular cities and states automatically appear on the operator's computer screen. The new service also places a strong emphasis on ensuring the most accurate information available. Listings for U S WEST's 14-state region will be obtained from the company's own internal customer database. Listings outside the region will come from the Nortel Quest411 system, which includes more than 120 million current listings from other local phone companies. ``Industry experts have been brought in to conduct studies and ensure the ongoing accuracy of our databases,'' Peterson added. ``Our operators have advanced searching aids and an express-listing correction system in place to handle difficult searches.'' In addition, U S WEST has established a special service center for customers to call with questions regarding the National Directory Assistance service. The number for the center is 1-800-337-0722. The new service is now available to all Colorado customers, plus most U S WEST payphones throughout the state. U S WEST charges for local listings remain unchanged. U S WEST plans to extend the service to all locations in its 14-state region during 1997. U S WEST Communications Group (NYSE:USW - news) provides telecommunications services to more than 25 million customers in 14 western and midwestern states. The company is one of two major groups that make up U S WEST, a company in the connections business, helping customers share information, entertainment and communications services in local markets worldwide. U S WEST's other major group, U S WEST Media Group, is involved in domestic and international cable and telephony, wireless communications, and directory and information services. SOURCE: U S WEST Communications Group [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ameritech has been operating a 'national directory assistance' service here for several months. A call to 411 gets information from any area code. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Florida PSC to Revisit 904 Split Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 19:48:03 -0700 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , Telecom@Eureka.vip. best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) wrote: > (2) Allowing 7-digit dialing within the same overlay area code gives > the incumbent LEC a huge advantage over the entering competitors. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sick of hearing all this crapola > about how 'allowing seven digit dialing within same overlay code gives > the incumbent LEC a huge advantage ...' That has *never* been demon- > strated or proven. Are not the competitor's customers going to be > calling one another just as often as the existing LEC's customers > call one another (within the same code)? Is not the LEC going to be > assigning its own customers to the new overlay code as well? If I > am an existing customer of LEC and you choose to go with a competitor > and we wish to talk to each other, I'll need to dial your area code > as often as you need to dial mine. In the meantime both of us can > continue to dial seven digits for many of our calls. No, the competitor's customers are NOT going to be calling one another just as often as the existing LEC's customers call one another. Not by a long shot. It's simple math. If you put in an overlay at about the same time that the CLECs start into business, then you have a situation where: (1) The vast majority of the numbers in the old area code belong to customers of the incumbent LEC. (2) The great majority of all numbers are still in the old area code, at least for the first couple of years. (3) The majority of the customers of the CLECs will get numbers in the new area code, while only a relatively small fraction of the ILEC's customers get the new area code (especially if the ILEC is allowed to continue reusing discontinued numbers in the old area code). In any event, customers of the CLEC are disproportionately likely to get the new area code. (4) Therefore, the great majority of calls will be placed BY people in the old area code, and the great majority of calls will be placed TO people in the old area code. In other words, the people who sign up with the CLEC will have to dial 10 for most of their calls, while the people with the ILEC will most often be able to dial only 7 -- and furthermore will mostly dial 10 only if they're calling a customer of the CLEC. That means that it is easier to place most of your calls if you are a customer of the ILEC, and it is easier for most of your friends/customers/ whoever to call you if you are a customer of the ILEC. THAT is a competitive advantage for the ILEC, and not just whining. If you mandate 10D (or 1+10D) for all calls in the overlay, then the competitive advantage pretty much disappears; the only thing left to whine about is the "goodwill value" of having the "familiar" area code. I support overlays wholeheartedly, but I agree that an overlay must be the end of 7-digit dialing, just as the introduction of a second prefix in a small town must be the end of 4-digit dialing. ** Do not spam e-mail me! ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best-com >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Apr 97 15:13 CDT From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: Florida PSC to Revisit 904 Split Organization: TIPFKAG [World-Wide Access, Chicago, Illinois 60606-2804] TELECOM Digest Editor commented on in comp.dcom.telecom: > In Chicago itself, there might as well be an overlay between 312 and > 773; the essence of one is present anyway on the north side boundary > line between the two codes as it juts in and out, up and down side > streets and between houses on the same block over a range of about a > mile along Armitage Avenue. Not only that, but the two area codes are sprinkled in spots among one another as it is: all public schools have phones in 773, even those situated in 312 territory, and all police stations, fire stations, parks, and public libraries throughout the city have phone numbers in 312. Bits of overlay are present all over the city. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For persons wondering why that is the case, it is because all public schools are served by a centrex which is based at the school board headquarters which is in 773 territory and all city agencies are served by a centrex which is located at city hall in downtown Chicago's 312 territory. PAT] ------------------------------ From: BGOODIN@UNEX.UCLA.EDU (William R. Goodin) Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Commercial Satellite Communications" Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 12:18:06 PDT Organization: UCLA Extension On July 28-August 1, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Commercial Satellite Communications: Systems and Applications" on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bruce R. Elbert, Hughes Space & Communications, David A. Baylor, DirecTV, and David Bell, Hughes Space & Communications. Each participant receives the course textbook, "The Satellite Communication Applications Handbook", B. Elbert (Artech House, 1997), and extensive course notes. This course is intended for practicing telecommunications engineers, satellite and earth station designers and manufacturers, professionals in the satellite communications industry (technical, operations and marketing), and major private and governmental users of satellite and terrestrial telecommunications services, domestic and international. It covers all aspects of the design, operation and use of satellite networks, with a heavy emphasis on commercial applications. The latter include television transmission and broadcasting (distribution and direct-to-home), voice and data networks using Very Small Aperture Terminals (VSATs), mobile satellite services, and advanced broadband capabilities of satellites under development. Each of the four days is broken down into a major segment to provide background in the engineering fundamentals, a detailed review of the current applications and implementations, and evolution of the technology and use of satellite systems in the coming millennium. Course topics include: Evolution of Satellite Technology and Applications Satellite Links and Access Methods Satellite System Implementation The Range of Television Applications Digital Video Compression Systems and Standards Direct-to-Home TV Broadcasting by Satellite Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) Networks Telephone Services by Satellite Use of VSATs for Video Applications Mobile Satellite Communications--GEO and Non-GEO Advanced Mobile Satellites--Service to Handheld Terminals Digital Audio Broadcasting--A New Application on the Horizon Broadband and Multimedia Systems Evolution of the Satellite Business How to Stay Abreast and Valued in the Satcom Industry The course fee is $1495, which includes the course text and 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: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Digital Signal Processing" Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 18:05:00 -0700 On July 28-August 1, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Digital Signal Processing: Theory, Algorithms and Implementations", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructor is Robert Stewart, PhD, Faculty Member, Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland. Each participant receives a Digital Signal Processing Reference Glossary (500 pages); multimedia reference CD-ROM featuring algorithms, DSP sample problems, graphs, and comprehensive notes; software and hardware workbook and manuals; and lecture notes. This course presents the core theory and algorithms of DSP and demonstrates through laboratory sessions the real-time and real-world implementation of digital signal processing strategies. It is intended for engineers, computer scientists and programmers, and project management staff. After presenting the mathematical tools and theory of DSP, the course features practical laboratory sessions that allow participants to simulate and implement advanced DSP systems such as acoustic echo cancellers or psychoacoustic compression strategies. Participants should obtain the tools and materials necessary to apply DSP methods immediately at their workplace, as well as: o Analyze discrete time systems using time domain mathematics o Analyze discrete time systems using frequency domain mathematics o Design and implement FIR, IIR, and adaptive digital filters for real-world applications in digital audio and acoustics and telecommunications o Understand the theory of adaptive signal processing systems and how to apply to real-world problems o Understand the DSP theory of signal coding and compression o Undertake DSP system design using advanced analysis and design software o Implement real-time digital filters, and adaptive digital filters using DSP simulation software, and real-time DSP processor hardware o Apply DSP theory and algorithms in the application domains of modern computing, multimedia systems, and communication systems o Integrate theoretical and practical skills to undertake a DSP design project. SystemView software (running on Windows 3.1/95) will be used for the DSP software laboratory sessions. This advanced software provides a comprehensive, state-of-the-art DSP toolbox for modern signal processing. An evaluation license will be available to participants so that they can continue to use the software after the course. The course fee is $1495, 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: Cnavarro@wcnet.org (Carl Navarro) Subject: PROspect 3549 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 13:12:28 GMT (Regards manual to dial conversion of PROspect exchange in Chicago): I must have been the brightest 2 year-old there ever was:). Anyway, I distinctly remember that it was somewhere between August and December of 1955, since I was only 5 and I didn't know how to use the dial! Anyway, it was VERY interesting for me to hear about Chicago and, of course, Orchard Field. I worked for ITT in Des Plaines in 1980. I always thought I'd love to live somewhere in the NW suburbs, like Park Ridge, and commute to downtown someday and ride the train. Fortunately, I didn't :). Carl P.S. My sister worked at the Hawthorne plant back in the early '60 s. I remember touring the plant, but I don't remember too much about it. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #107 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 3 01:51:08 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA01363; Sat, 3 May 1997 01:51:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 01:51:08 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705030551.BAA01363@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #108 TELECOM Digest Sat, 3 May 97 01:51:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 108 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Raises Rates Due to Coin Phones/Telecom Act (Danny Burstein) BellSouth, Payphones and AOSlime (Mark J. Cuccia) Redundancy Schemes for ATM vs TDM (Jim Holland) Area 703 Calls (Carl Moore) Employment Opportunity: [Austin, TX] Applications Engineer (J. Stroud) FCC Universal Service Hearing to be Cybercast Online! (Monty Solomon) What's the Status of the Lawsuit Against Destiny Telecom? (Liz Ashraph) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 2 May 1997 10:18:03 EDT From: Danny Burstein Subject: AT&T Raises Rates Due to Coin Phones/Telecom Act The Telecom Act, which blindsided far too many folk.who.should.have. known.better, who only picked up on the CDA portion, also stated that IXCs would have to reimburse coin phone owners for calls made from their equipment. This became a big issue as customers switched more and more to using calling cards/1-800/888/collect methods to place their calls, thus using the coin phone (in the opinion of the owner), for "free". (In Texas, the local version of the Public utilities Commission has, in fact, authorized payphones to charge an access fee, generally being $0.25, for calls to 1-800/888. Hmm, can anyone advise if this also applies to collect calls?). (Coin phones operated by the local telcos got, so to speak, 'paid off' through the [roughly] $0.03/minute kickba^h^h^h access charge the IXCs paid the local carriers) Anyway, the Telecom Act ordered that the IXCs give money back to the COCOTS as well. Two plans were proposed -- one with a $0.35 payment per call, the other through a monthly flat rate of [mumble -- something like $35 ... sorry, don't have the rules in front of me]. We had some pretty extensive discussions in TELECOM Digest as to how this would be worked out, including the suggestion that various places would _block_ incoming 1-800 calls from coin phones since they might have to pay extra for them ... Well, about a month ago we saw MCI's response, which was to absorb the extra costs in its general 1-800/888 service and raise all its listed (incoming) rates a couple of percent. And today's {Wall Street Journal} (01-May-1997, p. C-9) has AT&T doing the same. To quote: Notice to AT&T Business Long DIstance Customers AT&T will file tariff revisions with the FCC to increase domestic Business Interstate Inbound Services rates by 7%. Additionally, domestic Business Interstate Outbound Service rates and Business International rates will increase by 2%. These rates are scheduled to become effective May 1, 1997. These increases result from the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which required the FCC to develop a payphone compensation plan for all calls made from payphones. As a result of FCC action, Inter-Exchange carriers are required to pay payphone providers for calls completed [1] on their payphones. [1] Hmm, I thought it was just calls that _originate_ from payphones. Does this mean that if I use payphones at home and work, that I'll get paid each time someone calls me????? hmmmmmmm Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 17:40:09 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: BellSouth, Payphones and AOSlime I've frequently mentioned in the Digest that, IMO, BellSouth is probably the most customer-friendly LEC in the US and Canada. They also recently received the J.D.Powers award. BellSouth has their AreaPlus plan which 'monthly-flat-rates' _all_ calls within ~40 miles within the same LATA ... and their Complete Choice plan for any/all "Vertical Services" (Call Waiting, CW-Deluxe, Caller-ID, 3-Way Calling, etc) at a single fixed monthly price. Under the optional Complete Choice plan, if a new service (such as CW-Deluxe) becomes available in your serving switch, you can add it to your line/account, at _NO_ extra charge, neither one-time, nor an increased recurring monthly charge! BellSouth offers 24-hour/7-day Business Office service (at least for residential), although there may be times when one has to wait on hold for a while if the reps are busy with other customers. Some BellSouth 'traditional' tariffed local/EAS calling areas (single monthly flat-rate) can be _QUITE_ large (i.e. Atlanta metro). I'm referring to the 'basic/traditional' local area, not AreaPlus, nor state-specific plans such as Louisiana's "LOS" (Local Optional Service). Those optional plans can increase the size of the local (free) or heavily discounted intra-LATA toll dialing area. For the most part, I find BellSouth's Business Office rep's, Repair rep's, and intra-LATA (TOPS) Operators to be friendly and informed. (Of course, I did have some problems with new NPA's not being properly loaded in time, into the translation tables of local #1AESS offices, back in 1996 and some already this year). Recently, I've found BellSouth's Business Office rep's to be quite helpful and understanding in removing strange AOSlime and other like PAY-per-call charges from a bill when there is a dispute. Back in February, I was receiving a few calls from the Orleans Parish (county) Prison, according to my Caller-ID box. The Sheriff's Dept and Parish Prison, etc. are located in the "Broadmoor" wirecenter of the New Orleans ratecenter. ("Broadmoor", 504-82x, was a new wirecenter in 1962, in the mid-city area, carved out of adjacent SxS wirecenters, and it was a #5XB [also serving TWX], until cut to #5ESS in Sept. 1987). The numbers displayed on my Caller-ID box were 504-82x-9xxx or 504-82x-8xxx. Traditionally (prior to BVA and LIDB), the -9xxx and -8xxx line number ranges have been reserved for coin/pay/public telephones/lines. The name part of the ID box displayed "PAY PHONE". I knew these calls were coming from the local jail, since I had a voicemail message left one morning, from someone wanting to be bailed out. My outgoing message for voicemail does NOT include the words "YES" or "OKAY". When I got home, I saw the "PAY PHONE" and 504-82x-8/9xxx number on my ID box at the time the voicemail message was left. A few days later, I received a call into my cellphone (since my home phone is forwarded first to my cellphone), and I kept saying "Hello, Hello, Hello". I'd heard some background noise, and then an automated voice saying "You have a collect call from Orleans Parish Prison from ---". Needless to say, I hit the 'end' button RIGHT AWAY on my cellphone. When I got back home fifteen minutes later, I had ANOTHER call from 504-82x-8/9xxx, "PAYPHONE". And there were a few other calls from "PAYPHONE" at 504-82x-8/9xxx for about two weeks, but nothing left into my voicemail nor rolled over to my cellular. On EVERY one of these calls displaying as such on my Caller-ID box, I checked with the Business Office who told me that they were listed with the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Dept. or Orleans Parish Prison. I explained to the Business Office to flag my account so that if some AOSlime tried to bill me local collect charges (possibly with any HUGE surcharges) that such charges were going to be DISPUTED. I also called up the Sheriff's Office and requested that such calls be investigated and/or halted. The "telecom" manager said that he could program my number to be 'blocked' from being dialed from the prison pay phones. I recently received my monthly bill from BellSouth, with a 94-cent charge on a page labelled Integretel/KR&K. The originating number was 504-82x-8/9xxx, and the date of the one-minute 'collect' call was for the one which 'hit' my voicemail. I called up BellSouth right away, and they told me that I wasn't going to have to pay the charge as it was already in dispute (!), although it would be 'on my account' until the dispute could be investigated. The rep was quite helpful and said that if such charges appeared in the future to call them up right away if I wished to dispute them! BTW, after calling up the Sheriff's Office's "telecom" department and being told that my number could be 'blocked' from being called from their prison payphones, I had NO more such incoming calls from these 504-82x-xxxx "PAYPHONE" numbers on my Caller-ID box. HOWEVER ... BellSouth has sunk itself in ANOTHER way, and this involves their OWN payphones. Remember that last fall, I prepared an article on how (most) BellSouth public coin payphones were "COCOT-ized" in that they weren't using central office coin control/detection nor Bell-TOPS/AT&T-OSPS ACTS/Operator coin control/detection -- i.e. they were thus now being interfaced with the c/o like a COCOT with internal chips. (Actually, in Summer 1993 they began retrofitting their coinphones with COCOT-like chips, but the c/o or TOPS/OSPS still did traditional coin control. The Summer 1993 thru Fall 1996 period was a 'hybrid' method of BellSouth telco coin phone operation). Even under the 'full COCOT-like' interface, the BellSouth coinphones were still routing 0+ inTRA-LATA local or toll to BellSouth TOPS. Local/EAS calls billed to card/collect/3d-pty (via BellSouth TOPS) here in Louisiana are $1.00 FLAT (unlimited time). There is the 75-cent 'surcharge' plus the 25-cent charge for the quarter you would have dropped in the phone. This even applies to full customer dialed/keyed automated calls, but the entire charge is flat, unlike some/most AOSlime and even _AT&T_ or MCI/Sprint/etc. handled local calls billed to a card which charge by the minute. However, last week, Stanley Cline (roamer1@pobox.com) alerted me to the fact that BellSouth payphones (with the cocot-like interface) in northern Georgia were sending 0+ inTRA-LATA traffic (both local and toll) to some strange AOSlime! I wanted to test if such was happening here in Louisiana. Only problem is that MOST all payphones in New Orleans are now actual COCOT's rather than BellSouth. Yesterday, I did have a chance to test a BellSouth payphone (with cocot-like interface), and SURE ENOUGH, dialing 0+ten-digits in the LATA (whether local or toll) caused the payphone to dial out some 950-xxxx or 800/888- access number. The automated voice in the phone's chips were stating "please wait" while the payphone touchtoned out other identification tones to the AOSlime (just like most any sleaze COCOT using sleaze AOSlime). Both Stan and I have determined that the AOSlime is "TelTrust" (whoever the heck they are). However, this AOSlime for BellSouth payphones is INDICATING ITSELF AS BELLSOUTH! Their rates include some STRANGE AND EXPENSIVE Surcharges, even for LOCAL calls billed to card/etc! When I quizzed her, she admitted that she wasn't really BellSouth, but that BellSouth had contracted them. BTW, TelTrust's CIC code is 10(10)485. But when I dial 10(10)485-1-700-555-4141, I get "Thank you for choosing BellSouth" rather than identification as TelTrust. This is NOT the same voice as the REAL BellSouth "thank you for using/choosing BellSouth" voice when using REAL BellSouth TOPS or Toll switches. This is unforgiveable. I know that BellSouth has to compete with COCOT vendors for location/property owners, and I know that there is the new payphone deregulation. BellSouth has also put their public/coin/pay telephones under a separate subsidiary. But for BellSouth to send the general public to AOSlime rather than genuine BellSouth TOPS for 0+ intraLATA is HORRIBLE. (BTW, A single-0 by itself from the phones still route to the REAL BellSouth operator). BellSouth DOES have a CIC-code for using the real BellSouth toll or TOPS services (on a per-call basis) if another carrier is chosen as the primary inTRA-LATA Equal Access fg.D toll carrier in those states where this is happening. The CIC-code is 101-5124+. It also works in those states where BellSouth is still the only choice for primary inTRA-LATA fg.D E/A toll (altho' 10(10)288+ for AT&T, 10(10)222 for MCI, etc. can be used to bypass BellSouth). And when using BellSouth 'cocot-ized/AOSlimed' payphones, 101-5124+0+ten-digits inTRA-LATA _DOES_ route to traditional BellSouth TOPS, with its TARIFFED less expensive rates. I would NEVER have thought that BellSouth would have allowed one of its divisions or subsidiaries to stoop so low as to route calls via AOSlime while still telling the customer that the service is BellSouth! Since real/traditional BellSouth TOPS is the most economical carrier for local/EAS calls billed to (LEC-issued) card when at a coinphone and not wanting to use coins, I will _ALWAYS_ dial 101-5124-0+ for local/EAS, and I hope others who live in or travel through BellSouth territory will do the same as well. (Note that I say LEC-issued card, as BellSouth and AT&T have cancelled the mutual card-honoring arrangement for AT&T-issued cards for BellSouth handled inTRA-LATA calls). And for inTRA-LATA _TOLL_, I plan to (and usually do) route/bill my call via AT&T (or sometimes Sprint or MCI), and haven't for the past seven years via BellSouth! Stan Cline also reports to me the following additional information: "BellSouth is still routing (0+ten-digits inTRA-LATA local and toll) calls from their Nortel Millenium "smart" payphones, **and** from the blue charge-a-call phones (and the desk-type phones in hotels) to TOPS. I don't know if the Nortel phones just aren't programmed yet, or what." "And the agreement for BellSouth calling cards to work in AT&T's card-reader phones (one can dial 1-800-Call-ATT/1-800-321-0288 and bill to a BellSouth card, but canNOT swipe the card in the phone itself.) According to AT&T, BELLSOUTH, NOT AT&T, canceled THAT agreement!" I haven't really seen the blue "charge-a-call" Bell phones in some time. They were quite in vogue here in New Orleans in the early 1980's, when South Central Bell's payphones were still "ground-start/coin-first". Around 1984/85, Jefferson Parish and Orleans Parish began to introduce 911 service and SCBell started changing their payphones to "Dial-tone-first/loop-start". Therefore, there wasn't really a need for as many blue "Credit" phones as there had been. But for the most part, blue "Credit" phones are still "dumb" phones on a standard loop with 1+ toll restrictions in the c/o. I also have never seen a Nortel Millenium "super" payphone in the New Orleans area, whether from BellSouth or from a COCOT company. I haven't been out to the Airport in _YEARS_, but the last time I was there around 1990 or so, Bell had some 'super' payphones which were standard single-slot WECO housings retrofitted with a card-swipe, touch-a-carrier speed dial buttons, and an LCD-readout. Various types of mag-cards could be inserted including LEC-issued cards, LD-carrier-issued cards, or 'commercial' (Visa, MC, AMEX, Discovery, Diners Club, etc) credit cards, etc. These phones had modem/chips inside, but they were also coin-controlled/detected in the traditional way by the network (c/o, TOPS/OSPS-ACTS, etc). They also had a way to access a separate credit-card validation database. I don't know if BellSouth has changed over to Nortel manufactured 'super' payphones at the New Orleans International Airport (Moisant/MSY) or any other major tourist/convention centers. I also haven't really seen many AT&T-CardCaller phones (the ones with the video screen instruction readout) lately, nor the desk-mounted version of such AT&T phones at hotels lately. That doesn't mean they aren't around, but I haven't been looking lately. As for mag-swipes, there is special encoded information in the mag-stripe on the back of the card. AT&T still accepts LEC-issued cards when calls are placed (10(10)288)-0+ or 800-CALL-ATT/800-3210-ATT from such phones, and the card number is entered at the bong or quoted to the operator. But maybe the mag-stripe encoding indicates BellSouth at such phones, and the internals of the phone reject the card in that manner. The BellSouth 'super' payphones _do_ accept an AT&T-card in the mag-swipe, and it causes the phone to dial-out 10(10)288+0+, whether the called number is local or toll, inTRA-LATA or inTER-LATA, thus putting the call via the AT&T network. I also called up BellSouth public phone Business Office (557-COIN =2646 from former South Central Bell; 780-2175 from former Southern Bell ... these are _not_ dialable as such from _outside_ of the nine-state area), to voice my displeasure at the new AOSlime situation from BellSouth's phones. The rep I spoke with gave me _three_ different conflicting stories or situations as to what was now happening. Finally, when I told her that I was going to complain to the La.PSC and the FCC, and post something on the Internet, she told me that "this shouldn't happen on inTRA-LATA calls, only on inTER-LATA calls if the location owner requested it, and that Public Phone Repair Service should be notified that the phones were 'misprogrammed'." I don't know if that was really the case ... I think that BellSouth thought they could get something over on the general public, but at least we now know about 101-5124+0+. But in most _other_ traditional service offerings, BellSouth is still (IMO) the most customer-friendly local telco in North America. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone I know here in Skokie has installed a COCOT outside their place of business. They asked my advice on how it should be programmed, and actually took my advice. I think it provides pretty decent service, and it seems to be getting a lot more business than the three Ameritech payphones nearby. The Ameritech payphones are at the other end of the building, in an area that is quite dark at night. They are not lighted. They sit directly under a pigeon roost and are constantly filthy with pigeon droppings. The switchooks and tone pads are frequently in poor working order. On the other hand, the COCOT sits alone, several feet away in an area on the sidewalk well-lighted at night by the flourescent signs at the place of business. In addition, the COCOT itself is lighted, via a small tube under the plastic shell on the top of the container. I found it interesting that you can operate a certain type of flourescent bulb on low-voltage (like about 9-10 volts output from a transformer which is plugged in a regular 110 AC line in the place of business). The phone is programmed as follows: Local area (Skokie, Evanston, Morton Grove, Niles, Wilmette, Glenview, Park Ridge, and Golf, Illinois, all 847 points) 30 cents for five minutes. Also Chicago-Newcastle (in 773, but local) 30 cents for five minutes. The Ameritech phones charge 35 cents for initial deposit. Further north points in 847 range from 40-45-50 cents for five minutes depending on how far north. All of 773 (except Newcastle, mentioned above) and 312 -- in other words, all of Chicago -- is fifty cents for five minutes. Ameritech gets between 45-75 cents for those calls. The west suburbs in 630 plus most of 708 is 50 cents for five minutes. The southern part of 708 is 55-60 cents for five minutes. Long distance is programmed (and the phone proudly indicates this on a sign attached) to be one dollar (coins of course, not calling card) for three minutes anywhere in the continental USA. Additional minutes are 25 cents each. Canadian area codes plus 808/907 are set for $2.00 for the first minute and fifty cents per minute after that. Area 809 and its various split-offs are all blocked -- calls not allowed. Calls to 800/888 are allowed at no charge, although the owner will be compensated eventually at whatever rate is decided. The phone is attached to a 'coin line' which according to Ameritech (a) 'fraud- proofs' the phone against incoming collect charges, 800 charge back type lines ala Pilgrim Telephone, and (b) automatically puts him in line to receive the subsidy from the IXC's when it is finalized. The sign mentioned above says that for least expensive rates on long distance calls to use coins (the three minutes for one dollar deal as described) and continues, saying 'alternate inexpensive billing methods include 1-800-CALL-ATT, 1-800-AMERITECH (for calling card calls) and 1-800-COLLECT via MCI. "You may if you wish dial zero and be serviced by the IOS Operator Service at a somewhat more expensive rate per call." Finally -- and this to me is sort of a class act -- the COCOT speed dial positions (*0 through *9) are programmed with 'public service' numbers all operating free or for 25 cents each. For example one speed dial position dials the RTA/CTA Transit Inform- ation service 'to recieve public transit schedule information for this location'; another speed dial position connects to the local taxicab service; a third connects to a time-of-day/weather message and another one to 'report problems with this phone.' I am rather pleased the owner took the trouble to have the phone programmed in a non-ripoff fashion. Long distance is handled by AT&T on default calls. Apparently the public seems to like it also since it has been quite busy in the three weeks it has been in service. The owner goes outside and wipes the phone and its housing clean every day (the pigeons hang around there also) and each time I have walked past (or deliberatly stood around to see what it was doing) I see someone using it. This is a relatively busy bus stop corner, and instead of walking several yards to use the filthy, unlighted, and often times broken Ameritech phones people are seeing the COCOT and using it instead. The owner tells me the company which installed it and maintains it gives him a thirty percent piece of the action. He was told when the coin collector comes out to 'dump the box' he will come inside, count the money and hand over a third of it on the spot to the merchant. I can't help but think that much of the bum rap COCOTS have received in the past has been due to the ignorance of their owners in setting them up properly. In this case, the company which put it in told the store owner, "anything you want it programmed to do, let us know; it is all handled by our computer." He did not have the slightest idea what he wanted on the phone, so he asked me. I think if more COCOT owners would genuinely make an effort to *compete* with the local telco payphones, they would be amazed at the results. On his behalf I dealt directly with the installer/programmer, and we both had the same idea about the same time: always charge a nickle less than the Ameritech phones. Always charge as little as possible for long distance while still making a profit. Try and find a Genuine Bell payphone with three minutes of long distance for four quarters ... Do not be afraid to encourage people to use their calling cards via 800 'bypass' numbers set up by long distance carriers, since most will take advantage of the $1/three minutes thing anyway. By the way, this COCOT connects to 411 (Ameritech's national directory assistance line) for a flat rate of sixty cents, and it connects to any-555-1212 for seventy-five cents. I think the guy who owns the shop where it is located is going to see some nice $$$ from it, in a legitimate way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jim Holland Subject: Redundancy Schemes for ATM vs TDM Date: 2 May 1997 02:22:54 GMT In today's public switched telephone network, traffic between switches is carried by a transport network that is engineered for high quality and reliability. One of the principal components of reliability in the transport network is facility redundancy (DS1, DS3, OC-3). The idea is to have an alternate path that can be used in the event of either a cable/fiber fault, or the failure of some transport network element. Two common schemes for implementing this redundancy are: 1. 1 for 1 redundancy: every active carrier has a standby that can be used if a failure is detected. 2. 1 for N redundancy: a group of N carriers has 1 standby facility that can replace any one (only one at a time) of the N facilities. In both cases, in response to a failure in the active path, the system will switch its traffic to the stand-by facility. This event is sometimes known as a protection switch. Now for my question ... Assuming that we have an ATM network carrying voice traffic for the PSTN, and that the ATM network is required to have the same level of reliability as that of today's transport networks, how is this redundancy implemented? Do today's ATM switches support the concept of a spare port that can be used as a stand-by port. Regards, Jim ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 May 97 10:26:24 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Area 703 Calls Do you know if there are any toll calls left within area code 703 now that area 540 has split from it? Toll as defined here does NOT include extended-area local. Also, I take it there are local calls across the 703/540 border; Leesburg is the seat of Loudoun County, and the next exchange west of there along route 7 should be 540-338 Purcellville (would those be the 10D variety?). Someone at the help line has told me that outside of the DC area, 7D would still be useable for those scattered cases of local calls from Md. to Del., Pa., W. Va., and one case to eastern shore Virginia. You've already got the 10D variety for local to DC and Va. suburbs (also across the 301/410 border, which affects, say, Silver Spring to Columbia and vice versa). And at least for now, 202 and 703 are still allowing 7D for local calls within area code (this includes those extended-area local calls, see above). So 240 is restricted as a prefix there, to allow for local calls going to Maryland-suburban phones in area 240. (In addition to the already-existing restrictions on use of 202,301,703,410 as prefixes.) Until after the full cutover of 10D for local within Md., you can't have phones in area codes 240 and 443, at least between Baltimore and Washington, because some 7D local calls within 301 started with 240 and 443. (Yes, I know today is the full cutover; 9-278-xxxx in an attempt to reach my own office phone in 410 area got the "improper access code" message within the office exchange. I should get a message -- obviously different -- if I try 7D from my home phone, which is also in 410.) ------------------------------ From: MCI.TELECOMMUNICATIONS@drn.zippo.com (Jimmy Stroud, Jr.) Subject: Employment Opportunity: [Austin, TX] Applications Engineer Date: 1 May 1997 08:33:12 -0700 Organization: MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION Network Systems Engineering Division Applications Test Engineer Applies knowledge of engineering principles and practices in the integration testing and field implementation of the Adjunct Processor/Save platform. Works independently with minimum supervision in the following: review technical documentation, analyze requirements, analyze test platform, hardware, circuit requirements, perform test bed configuration, define entrance and exit criteria, define detailed integration end-to-end test plan, perform regression, integration, end-to-end, performance and stress testing, perform field implementation. Work with a test team through the entire release, testing and implementation. Travel to remote sites to execute developed field implementations. Qualifications: B.S. degree or equivalent with 4-5 years in the areas of Data Communication protocols, telecom systems and systems integration testing experience. Detailed knowledge of Stratus computer systems, VOS and Unix, thorough knowledge of X.25, SNA, other protocols. Must possess excellent written and verbal communication skills combined with strong planning, coordination, analytical problem solving skills. Requires initiative with good work ethics, mature leadership capabilities. Also requires Unix and VOS operating systems, Stratus or IBM knowledge. JOB CODE:TCR13063 Please send resumes to the attention of Jimmy Stroud, Jr. Fax resumes to (770) 284-4866 or E-mail to 2176930@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 02:13:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Universal Service Hearing to be Cybercast Online! Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 18:29:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Shabbir Safdar Subject: EVENT: FCC Universal Service Hearing to be cybercast online! ========================================================================= _ _ __| | ___ _ __ ___ ___ ___ _ __ __ _ ___ _ _ _ __ ___| |_ / _` |/ _ \ '_ ` _ \ / _ \ / __| '__/ _` |/ __| | | | | '_ \ / _ \ __| | (_| | __/ | | | | | (_) | (__| | | (_| | (__| |_| |_| | | | __/ |_ \__,_|\___|_| |_| |_|\___/ \___|_| \__,_|\___|\__, (_)_| |_|\___|\__| |___/ Government Without Walls Update No.6 http:/www.democracy.net/ May 1 1997 _________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents - Sit in on live FCC Universal Service hearing: May 7, 9:30am Eastern - Live Town Hall Meeting with FCC Chairman Reed Hundt: May 13, 7pm Eastern - In our archive - About democracy.net / Subscription Information ___________________________________________________________________________ SIT IN ON LIVE FCC UNIVERSAL SERVICE HEARING: WEDNESDAY MAY 7, 9:30AM ET The future of Universal Service in the nation's telecommunications network is one of the key elements of our nation's communications infrastructure. At issue - how to ensure that citizens who live in rural and inner city areas have access to advanced telecommunications services, and how to pay for it. The 1996 Telecommunications Reform Act directed the FCC to answer these questions. After nearly a year of investigation, hearings, and public comment, the FCC will announce its rules on Wednesday May 7th. You can join the proceeding live. Be present, ask questions, and get answers from FCC staff after the hearing. (FCC staff are not allowed to comment on a matter before the Commission before the commissioners have made their ruling.) Best of all, FCC Chairman Reed Hundt will join democracy.net on Tuesday May 13 for an online town hall meeting. Hundt will discuss the Universal Service proceeding and respond to questions from Internet users. * Universal Service Hearing - How To Participate * DATE: Wednesday, May 7, 1997 TIME: 9:30 am Eastern / 6:30 am Pacific (Event will last +/- 3 hours) LOCATION: http://www.democracy.net In advance of the hearing, please visit http://www.democracy.net for background information on the Universal Service issue, including links to various sides of the debate. You can also submit questions in advance. _____________________________________________________________________________ LIVE TOWN HALL MEETING WITH FCC CHAIRMAN REED HUNDT: TUESDAY MAY 13, 7PM ET During the May 7th Universal Service Proceeding, Internet users can submit their questions and comments via democracy.net. On Tuesday May 13, FCC Chairman Reed Hundt will join democracy.net for a live Virtual Town Hall meeting to discuss the Universal Service proceeding, respond to Internet users questions, and discuss other Internet-related issues before the FCC. This is a great opportunity for Internet users to talk with one of the key telecommunications policy makers. * Online Town Hall Meeting with FCC Commissioner Reed Hundt * * How To Participate * DATE: Tuesday, May 13, 1997 TIME: 7:00 pm Eastern / 4:00 pm Pacific LOCATION: http://www.democracy.net Visit http://www.democracy.net/ in advance of the event to submit questions. Additional information can be found at the FCC home page: http://www.fcc.gov _______________________________________________________________________________ IN OUR ARCHIVE * ONLINE TOWN HALL MEETING WITH REP. RICK WHITE NOW AVAILABLE IN OUR ARCHIVE! "I don't want to minimize the National Security concerns -- these concerns are real - but I think we've reached the point where the National Security community is going to have to solve these problems in a new world. You can't delay the arrival of the new world forever." -Rep. Rick White on encryption at 4/10 democracy.net town hall meeting You can listen to the entire transcript of the online town hall meeting, or selected excerpts, at http://www.democracy.net/archive/04101997/ * ONLINE TOWN HALL MEETING WITH REP. ANNA ESHOO NOW AVAILABLE IN OUR ARCHIVE! "I don't think Congress should rush into making decisions about the Internet. There are still far too many Members that are not users themselves, and therefore do not understand the medium." -Rep. Anna Eshoo on Congress and the net at 4/16 democracy.net online town hall meeting You can listen to the entire transcript of the online town hall meeting, or selected excerpts, at http://www.democracy.net/archive/04161997/ _______________________________________________________________________________ ABOUT DEMOCRACY.NET / SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION The democracy.net is a joint project of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and the Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) to explore ways of enhancing citizen participation in the democratic process via the Internet. To this end, democracy.net will host live, interactive cybercasts of Congressional Hearings and online town hall meetings with key policy makers. democracy.net is made possible through the generous support of WebActive (http://www.webactive.com), Public Access Networks (http://www.panix.com), the Democracy Network (http://www.democracynet.org), and DIGEX Internet (http://www.digex.net). More information about the project and its sponsors can be found at http://www.democracy.net/about/ To receive democracy.net announcements automatically, please visit our signup form at http://www.democracy.net/ or send mail to majordomo@democracy.net with "subscribe events" in the body of the message. To stop receiving announcements on the democracy.net "events" mailing list, please send mail to majordomo@democracy.net with the phrase "unsubscribe events" in the message body. _____________________________________________________________________________ End update no.6 05/01/1997 ============================================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 15:03:00 -0400 From: Liz Ashraph Subject: What's the Status of the Lawsuit Against Destiny Telecom? Does anyone know if the lawsuit against Destiny has been settled or where that stands? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #108 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 3 03:46:24 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id DAA06699; Sat, 3 May 1997 03:46:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 03:46:24 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705030746.DAA06699@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #109 TELECOM Digest Sat, 3 May 97 03:45:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 109 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: EBS Problems? (Michael Wright) Re: EBS Problems? (Daniel J. Meredith) Re: EBS Problems? (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: EBS Problems? (Toby Nixon) Re: EBS Problems? (James E Bellaire) Re: EBS Problems? (John Cropper) Re: EBS Problems? (Derek Peschel) Re: EBS Problems? (Gary Reardon) Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet (Stanley Cline) Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet (Fred Atkinson) Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet (nwdirect@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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: voe@telalink.net (Michael Wright) Subject: Re: EBS Problems? Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 12:39:06 GMT Organization: Telalink Corporation, Nashville, TN, USA Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > The EBS (Emergency Broadcasting System) has been going through > enhancements over the past few years, as I've read in various > broadcast communications engineering and industry journals. From what > I understand, there is supposed to be a silent 'digital' alerting > tone, which will replace the _LOUD_ two-tone (analog) alerting signal > that we've heard for a few decades. > Has anyone else been recently hearing these EBS tone-burst signals on > local or national radio or television? One would think that these tones > wouldn't be audible if the new enhanced system was supposed to be 'fully > digital'. Rush's show has been rudely interrupted a couple of times here in Nashville by the same combo of harsh multi-tones pulsing on and off ... but in each case the reason was a LOCAL weather bulletin. A telephoned voice drowsily, and sometimes unintelligibly, crept thru some sort of weather statement, taking far longer than necessary. Apparently the local station was inserting this tripe, not the net. Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 97 8:25:30 MST From: Daniel J. Meredith Subject: Re: EBS Problems? > The EBS (Emergency Broadcasting System) has been going through > enhancements over the past few years, as I've read in various > broadcast communications engineering and industry journals. From what > I understand, there is supposed to be a silent 'digital' alerting > tone, which will replace the _LOUD_ two-tone (analog) alerting signal > that we've heard for a few decades. (I seem to recall reading that > originally, the analog alerting tone was a single frequency). SNIP > Has anyone else been recently hearing these EBS tone-burst signals on > local or national radio or television? One would think that these tones > wouldn't be audible if the new enhanced system was supposed to be 'fully > digital'. There has been extensive testing going on in the Phoenix, Arizona area. The first changes began taking place a few months ago and were only on the radio stations. What is heard out here are two short buzzes followed by a message stating "This is a test of the Emergency Alert System. The Emergency Alert System will be replacing the Emergency Broadcast System..." Just last week the local television stations began testing the "Emergency Alert System." The process is exactly the same on the television stations, the exact same tones come across the audio path, with audio from the program completely muted. Then across the top of the screen in a blue box the message from EAS scrolls across the top in white letters. This has been the same for all of the stations I've caught it on. Interesting enough they are doing these tests in the middle of prime time programming instead of daylight like was normally done for the EBS. It will be interesting to know how well this works... Daniel "It's Nice To Be Important, But It's Important To Be Nice" Southwestco Wireless, L.P. Fax: +1-602-470-9418 ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: EBS Problems? Date: 1 May 1997 23:22:01 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates It's now called the Emergency Alert System, and while it's digital, it's _not_ inaudible. Check out http://www.fcc.gov/cib/eas/Welcome.html for more details, including the part 11 regs, and a description of the format. Naturally, the digital format cannot be decoded by any stock chip on the planet; fortunately, it's pretty slow, and straight FSK. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "To really blow up an investment house requires Tampa Bay, Florida a human being." - Mark Stalzer +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: EBS Problems Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 15:11:57 -0700 They've been using them here for a few months in the Seattle area. I hear them on KVI 570AM (which is what I usually listen to). My understanding is that the signal that is broadcast is modulated data that can be picked up by receivers and printed out or displayed. Supposedly, people who are deaf and wouldn't be able to hear emergency announcements on the radio will be able to buy these receivers and have them in their home. When there's a tornado or flood warning or some other emergency (do we worry much about nuclear attack anymore?), they'd be able to see the flashing light and read about the problem. So, although the signal is "digital", it must certainly be audible to be able to picked up by this equipment. -- Toby ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 16:06:12 -0500 From: James E Bellaire Subject: Re: EBS Problems? EAS - Emergency Alert System replaced EBS as of January 1st this year. The old EBS receivers are to be left connected as back up until January 1998. The new system has a header code that is sent three times, that is the 'screeeeeech screeeeeech screeeeeech' that you hear at the beginning of the alert. Then a shortened tone plays (only for valid emergencies) and a message of up to 2 minutes length. An end code plays in triplicate after the 'message' portion. That is the quick 'screech screech screech' at the end. A weekly test of the system, which can occur at any time of day instead of just daylight hours, can be under 30 seconds. This test is 'silent' because it does not have a spoken message inside the header. All the station does is announce the test (optional 'this is a test of the Emergency Alert System'), play the header and end codes (screeeeeech screeeeeech screeeeeech - screech screech screech), then returns to its regular program. Not exactly silent, but short with no tones. A monthly test is started by a primary station in each area or statewide and MUST be replayed within 15 minutes. This includes the tone and a script, and is similar to the old EBS tests except that it is coordinated on all area stations. The header code can tell you most of the content of the message, including the county or state involved. The eventual goal is to replace the NWS weather monitors with EAS monitors in homes. Then you can tell your box to listen to your county's code and whichever events interest you. The headers specify what event is happening, from special weather statements to tornado warnings. They are set codes that must be used so that anyone with EAS equiptment can decode any alert signal. EAS was based on the S.A.M.E. alert system that the NWS used. The message portion (inside the header/end codes) is stored and forwarded on other participating stations, unlike EBS where the operator had to transcribe and re-read when forwarded. The EAS message is generally the same as the headers would say, with any details information added. For example, an EAS header may say (in code) 'NWS issuing a TOR (Tornado Warning) for 018039 (All Elkhart County Indiana) effective 15:44 on 05/01 for 15 minutes' with the announcer reading this plus 'a funnel cloud was spotted 3 miles Southeast of the city of Elkhart heading Northeast at 10 miles per hour'. The stations around here still say their station's name at the end of the announcement ('stay tuned to U93 for more information') even though the exact message is stored and forwarded on other stations. They shouldn't be doing that since any future information would be sent through EAS on all stations, but old habits are hard to break. Some stations are also selling sponsorships of EAS (we play your ad right after any EAS message) hoping that listeners will stay tuned. Many NWS stations are adding EAS to their signals, with broadcast and cable systems receiving alerts directly as well as through the old EBS chain. The EAS equiptment is required, with the cheapest systems selling for around $1000. Broadcast and cable systems must by and have the equiptment in use by January 1st 1997. (Although the FCC is not giving fines out as long as a station has ordered equiptment and is acting in good faith.) There have been a ton of implementation problems since January 1st, with the system having problems decoding signals received from other starions or broadcasting the computer codes cleanly. When all the bugs are worked out it will be a better system, but for now we have to put up with the glitches like the one you described. Radio World has had good coverage of the implimentation of EAS and its problems, including a look back at the old CONNELRAD system (pre EBS). EAS is an evolvement of EBS that focuses the service on the way EBS was actually used, for weather and local emergencies. The national EBS system has not needed to be activated, but those tones have saved a lot of lives on the local level. For more information on EAS, search the web or visit the FCC at http://www.fcc.gov/cib/eas/Welcome.html James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Telecom Indiana Webpage http://www.iquest.net/~bellaire/telecom/ ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: EBS Problems? Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 18:10:01 -0400 Organization: lincs.net Reply-To: jcropper@NOSPAM.lincs.net Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > The EBS (Emergency Broadcasting System) has been going through > enhancements over the past few years, as I've read in various > broadcast communications engineering and industry journals. From what > I understand, there is supposed to be a silent 'digital' alerting > tone, which will replace the _LOUD_ two-tone (analog) alerting signal > that we've heard for a few decades. (I seem to recall reading that > originally, the analog alerting tone was a single frequency). The EBS is due to be decommissioned (supposedly by the end of 1997), and replaced by the Emergency Alert System (EAS). This transition will be highlighted by more modern equipment, including the 'silent' alerting system you mentioned. > One weekday afternoon about a week or two ago, I was listening to > WBYU-AM/1450, a station that airs nostalgic music from the 1930's > through the 1960's. Most of the time, they carry a satellite fed > service from ABC-Radio in Dallas TX, called the "Satellite Music/News > Networks", with the particular satellite music format called > "Stardust". The network itself airs news from ABC's American Direction > Radio Network. :-) ABC has more than a dozen "Networks", and it's no wonder that one of them might've been affected by a random switch flip at one of their company-owned stations ... > Has anyone else been recently hearing these EBS tone-burst signals on > local or national radio or television? One would think that these tones > wouldn't be audible if the new enhanced system was supposed to be 'fully > digital'. The EBS-EAS transition is not fully complete nationwide, hence the continuance of the 'audible' alerts ... John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 Legacy IS, Networking & Comm. Solutions 609.637.9434 P.O. Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 Unsolicited commercial e-mail is subject mailto:jcropper@lincs.net to a fee as outlined in the agreement at http://www.lincs.net/ http://www.lincs.net/spamoff.htm ------------------------------ From: dpeschel@u.washington.edu (Derek Peschel) Subject: Re: EBS Problems? Date: 1 May 1997 20:58:40 GMT Organization: University of Washington, Seattle > Has anyone else been recently hearing these EBS tone-burst signals on > local or national radio or television? One would think that these tones > wouldn't be audible if the new enhanced system was supposed to be 'fully > digital'. Yes, on a local radio station. It's KING FM (98.1 MHz). I've heard the new signals a couple of times, early in the morning. First the station plays a small announcement: "This station is required to conduct weekly tests of the Emergency Alert System." (or something like that) Then come the signals (IIRC, two long followed by three short bursts). I'm sure there's a concluding announcement but I don't remember what it is. The whole thing is over very quickly. The tests sound professionally done (not a mistake). I'm sure KING made a recording so they can play it often -- the tests always sound the same. Note the change of name -- "Emergency Alert System." So calling them EBS signals is apparently incorrect. They are clearly digital signals, but aren't inaudible. In an emergency, stations would play some kind of loud warning along with the quiet signal, but I don't know what that warning would sound like. KING's web page http://www.king.org/ doesn't seem to have any information about the EAS, but they do have RealAudio running so you can hear for yourself. Derek ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 21:17:35 -0400 From: Gary Reardon Subject: Re: EBS Problems? The new system (EAS) is not a 'silent' digital system, but multiple audible packet data bursts. As annoying as the old system, but actually carries information on the type of alert, where it came from, and who it's for. ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 19:34:04 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com On Mon, 28 Apr 1997 16:00:19 -0400, The Old Bear wrote: > area of internet connectivity for their subscribers. If this is > typical, I am both pleased for what it portends for rural access > to the net -- and deeply disturbed about the whining coming from In the Chattanooga area, most [read: all but one] of the surrounding non-Bell telcos, both co-op and traditional, provide internet access to their customers, *usually* (but not always) at rates close to the "big-city" rates. In many of the cases, one large ISP -- Info Avenue of (North? South?) Carolina provides connectivity which the rural telco resells to its customers. Others, such as Alltel and TDS, have built their own networks; yet others partner with existing local ISPs in adjoining areas. One telco [Trenton GA Telephone], OTOH, continues to milk its customers dry by forcing them to pay either inflated toll charges or $70/mo for a FX line to access Chattanooga as "local." -- they REFUSE to provide any local 'net access because they are so BACKWARD! Needless to say, I may be testifying before the Georgia PSC about the lack of local net access, along with the EAS MESS ... (I think the 'net sex/violence scares feed telco's reluctance; the cable company in Trenton dropped MTV after complaints. Given THAT, why would a telco provide/sponsor a conduit to even *worse* content? If they did, they may be subject to public outcry.) =20 *Bell*-served rural areas, and even smaller towns (~20-50k population) continue to experience a local-access shortage. For example, Rome, Georgia -- home to several small colleges and served by BellSouth -- had *no* local ISPs until about six months ago, and Meridian, Mississippi had only one or two ISP POPs until lately. That worries me -- Baby Bells pushing ISP service in large urban areas when rural and smaller communities are more in need of local access. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! CLLI MRTTGAMA42G NPA 770 ** scline(at)mindspring.com mailto:roamer1(at)pobox.com ** http://www.pobox.com/~roamer1/ From/Reply-To may be changed -- NO SPAM! http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ ------------------------------ From: fred_atkinson/skytel_at_skytelnotespo@mtel.com (Fred Atkinson) Date: Fri, 02 May 97 08:40:00 -0600 Subject: Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet I have a friend that lives in a little place called, 'Monetta, South Carolina'. Monetta is long distance to all of the three nearest major cities. As my friend was an old computer buff, he was very disheartened to be unable to get local Internet access for a while. The local carrier is 'Pond Branch' Telephone. They entered into an agreement with an Internet provider actively involved in arranging Internet coverage in rural areas. Suddenly, my friend was able to get local Internet access. Not only access, but the access was on the same exchange his telephone service was on (803-685). 'Pond Branch' later got their own domain name (pbtcomm.net). His Internet charges are billed on his home telephone number which is convenient. There is no reason in the world why rural areas can't get Internet access from a local provider. If they can't, it's because no one has been willing to provide it or because no one has tried. Fred ------------------------------ From: nwdirect@netcom.com Subject: Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 21:21:45 GMT The Old Bear (oldbear@arctos.com) wrote: > While rural cooperatives are not that unusual, I have not been > sufficiently close to them to know what they have been doing in the > area of internet connectivity for their subscribers. If this is > typical, I am both pleased for what it portends for rural access > to the net -- and deeply disturbed about the whining coming from > the Baby Bells who continue to complain about net access being a > problem rather than an opportunity. As the webmaster for a large directory of ISPs that lists locations access is provided I can tell you that more and more rural areas are getting Internet access through such providers. And with several providers now offering unlimited access for a flat fee using an 800-number it is possible for everyone who has a phone to get access without paying long-distance charges. * Internet Access Providers - Web Presense Providers - BBSes * * http://www.thedirectory.org/ - largest directory on the web * * tens of thousands of listings - over 7,500 Access Providers * * Telephone Prefix Locations - "The BBS Corner" - Web Banner Creation * ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #109 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun May 4 08:50:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA12759; Sun, 4 May 1997 08:50:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 08:50:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705041250.IAA12759@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #110 TELECOM Digest Sun, 4 May 97 08:50:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 110 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Carte Blanche to Steal (Judith Oppenheimer) NYNEX Rushes Massachusetts Into New NPAs (John Cropper) Commentary on Spam and it's Cost to Recipients (John DeBert) UUNET Pulling Peering Agreements; Now Charging (Monty Solomon) Another Spam With Free Cassette (Stan Schwartz) Review of Book on Long Distance Competition (Jack Decker) Marconi 6200 Microwave Test Set For Sale (Ed Coglio) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 03 May 1997 12:44:04 -0400 From: Judith Oppenheimer Reply-To: joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com Organization: ICB Toll Free News Subject: Carte Blanche to Steal FCC grants carriers carte blanche to steal what they've been buying. Over the course of the last three years, The Big Three promulgated the most offensive anti-brokering (read: anti-subscriber rights) language in the Toll Free Industry Guidelines, which are now essentially codified by the FCC Toll Free Access Codes Order. (CC Docket No. 95-155) During that same period, the Big Three -- AT&T, MCI and Sprint -- have been the most active and frequent buyers of toll-free numbers from subscribers. This is not an accusation --- it is an observation of fact, with literally hundreds if not thousands of substantiating transaction documents residing with subscribers throughout the U.S. The new FCC 800 Order (see ICB Cover Story -- http://www.icbtollfree.com -- or in case of server inertia, http://www.thedigest.com/icb/) mandates that carriers confiscate toll-free numbers from subscribers where there is a presumption of hoarding or brokering. The parameters of hoarding and brokering are not defined, except to implicate a very broad palate of normal business activity. Due process is not even addressed. Hence, where carriers have routinely pursued and obtained toll-free numbers for sums ranging from low five figures to mid six figures, they now have carte blanche to simply take what they want. Charged by the FCC with returning confiscated numbers to the available pool, the pilfering carrier has only to place the desired number in the available pool and then immediately pick it up, to comply -- and take off with its ill gotten gains. Good relationships and customer considerations notwithstanding, the friendliest of carriers could become a shark if its immediate need supersedes the value of your relationship with them. Furthermore, the carrier comes up looks rosey -- complying with the FCC -- and you look guilty as charged. The onus of proof would be on you. The only logical conclusion we can draw: You never know when one of your toll-free numbers might spell something invaluable to one of these top three buyers. Your best insurance would be to remove your toll-free numbers from AT&T, MCI and Sprint. Judith Oppenheimer Publisher ICB Toll Free News ICB TOLL FREE NEWS - 800/888/global800 news, analysis, advice. http://www.icbtollfree.com, http://www.thedigest.com/icb/ Judith Oppenheimer - 800 The Expert, ph 212 684-7210, fx 212 684-2714 mailto:j.oppenheimer@worldnet.att.net, mailto:icb@juno.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well honestly Judith, I never could understand why anyone would have their 800 number serviced by one of the big three when there are much smaller carriers such as Call America who provide *so much more* service for less cost. Consider all the hassles in even getting the big three to turn on an 800 number; the time delay before they can get it running, getting it moved from one termination point to another, etc. I have an 800 number with Call Home America (a division of Frontier) which has always worked fine. Their customer service is great. I have another 800 number with Call America (not to be confused with Call Home America) which I have discussed here a few times which also is extremely flexible with lots of extra features attached, etc. Ernie Strong is the contact point for Call America's MyLine Service. This is the one I discussed here several weeks ago with the 800 numbers with call forwarding/call waiting/three-way calling/outbound calling/wakeup service/voicemail/ callback stuff all attached as part of the one price. I hope readers who did not contact him earlier will do so now. I've used the service for years, and I remember years ago when I used to get 800 service from AT&T with all their foolishness. You have illustrated a good point Judith; just one more reason to let the big players do their own thing and take your telecom needs to smaller companies who appreciate your business. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: NYNEX Rushes Massachusetts Into New NPAs Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 14:32:05 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises Due to an "extreme jeopardy" situation declared by BellCore for area codes 508 and 617, NYNEX is advancing the premissive and mandatory dialing dates for both the 508/978 split and 617/781 split. BOTH area codes will split effective September 1, 1997, with a ninety-day permissive dialing period. Original plans had called for a February 1998 permissive dialing period, but the recent BellCore announcement forced a reassesment of NPA relief. Exchange lists (as released by BellCore) for both splits can be located at LINCS. John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 http://www.lincs.net/ The latest compiled area code information is available from us! NPAs, NXXs, Dates, all at http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ ------------------------------ From: John DeBert Subject: Commentary on Spam and it's Cost to Recipients Date: Sat, 03 May 1997 14:53:57 -0700 Organization: hypatia.com Parasites on the Internet: The senders of unsolicited commercial email and "spam" (both referred to hereinafter as "Spam") seem to me more as parasites, hucksters and scam or con artists than legitimate businesses. They send out their spams to addresses harvested indiscriminately from Usenet postings, mailing lists, archived material and other sources, regardless of any interests of the recipient. They post to multiple newsgroups, sometimes to every newsgroup, using resources belonging to others without paying for them to distribute their adverts. They use far more than a reasonable share of resources. They falsify and forge mail header lines, inserting false From: and Received: lines to conceal the source of the message, use other site's mailers to send their messages and provide no legitimate contact name, address or phone number. They evade criticism by using deceptive tactics as described above, and prevent direct responses to their mail, forcing people to use roundabout ways of contacting them and make it harder for people to request removal from their lists. I question whether most spammers are even legitimate businesses. They seem to go to great lenghts to conceal their identities and evade those seeking to find out who they are. Were these spammers to do these things using other, more traditional means such as the mails, they would have been shut down, fined and jailed. Yet on the Internet, they seem quite happy to disregard the laws enforced for the traditional media and quite happy to set aside ethics for a dollar or two. There have been similar scams using traditional media: Sending official looking letters that looked exactly like mail sent from government, sending important-looking mail with postage due, sending mail with false return addresses, et cetera. All these are now illegal and carry stiff penalties for violators. They lack the ethics of legitimate business. They are unconcerned whether their spam costs their recipients some money and they don't care about harming the reputation of people who have the addresses that they falsify or the sites that they use to distribute their junk. Spammers get a free ride, since all they have to pay for is their connection, not for the emormous amount of mail that they distribute. For them, being a parasite is profitable. Unlike spammers, many people must pay for their mail, whether sending or receiving, in the form of connect-time charges, quota fees, or even indirectly in the form of higher rates as their service provider raises fees to support better and larger mail systems to accomodate the huge volume of mail sent by spammers. Sometimes, as a result of spam, some people are denied services because the spam has caused their total file sizes to exceed quota, the mailer crashed due to overload, et cetera. In essence, spammers are spending other people's money, no, they're stealing other people's money to make their profit. Spam "Kings", much like Sanford "Spamford" Wallace, sell their services to unsuspecting and naive businesses hoping to advertise more widely. These spam kings fail to mention to their customers that spamming can cause harm to their business instead of improving it. The spam kings also help their customers unwittingly commit fraud by teaching them how to falsify headers, etc., or sell them software to do it automatically. Their customers end up with a reputation as bad as the spam kings and do not gain the customers they had hoped or had been promised. They are shocked at the hostility directed toward them for doing something that they were led to believe was legitimate and ethical. Spam kings claim to be providing a legitimate service. Yet were they to do the same in traditonal media, they would end up in prison, convicted of numerous misdemeanors, felonies and federal crimes. What they are doing instead is taking advantage of a lack of law or enforcement to engage in or encourage hucksterism, fraud and other deceptive and unethical practices. They're the modern equivalent to the snake oil peddlers, real estate shysters and used car salesmen of old, with one key difference: Everyone else is burdened by the majority of their business expense, not them. When it comes to the Internet, more than anywhere else, there are more than enough suckers to squeeze money from, whether it be a business looking for a new way of advertising or someone interested in a product or service. "Let the buyer beware" implies far more than anywhere else. What can be done? People are taking matters into their own hands. There are people who bombard the apparent senders with huge amounts of mail, flood their hosts with SYN messages, fax threats, etc. Some have undertaken it upon themselves to cancel posted advertisements. Some have gone so far as to block mail from known spammer sites and even all other unauthenticated sites. And some have complex filters in place to block mail that appears to be spam. But bombarding the apparent senders often strikes at people who are themselves victims of these scams. SYN flooding causes problems for a lot of people who have nothing to do with the spam, whether directly or indirectly. Blocking mail and even all connections from apparent spam sites may also block sites that have nothing to with spam, as they may have been broken into by a spammer, or inherited a spammer's IP address. Most such knee-jerk responses to spammers often have embarrassing consequences and make the person reacting look an idiot or fool. Some people announce that they will accept spam for a fee. It seems to work, sometimes, but not with spam kings. Others invoke federal laws designed to protect fax machines and cellular customers from solicitation, with somewhat more success but it has yet to be decided in court whether a computer system or network can be considered a fax machine as defined under law. Yet spammers have adapted. They forge headers, falsify From: and return addresses. They invade other site's mailers to distribute their junk. They block or divert incoming mail and use many other tactics, besides. Sometimes, when they don't get what they want, they threaten to sue to force people to carry their junk mail for free. A Modest Proposal: Extend federal prohibitions of fax and cellular phone solicitations to computers and networks. Spam does cost money and can deny use of computers and services by filling disks and quotas, consuming bandwidth on networks and even wasting paper. Admittedly, the expense of carrying and receiving spam seem intangible but it no more intangible than using any other means of electronic communication for soliciting: It still affects one's pocketbook and that is the point of view that should be looked at, rather than the point of view of convenience. Rather than going ballistic and harassing and threatening spammers, make complaints to law enforcement, politicians and to the spammers' service providers. Publish the spam, and the spammers' identities, most particularly if the spammer is a business, or if it appears to be a fraud. There's quite a bit that can be done. The Internet is still a frontier and the unscrupulous critters in it need to be placed on notice that their behaviour is intolerable, and that there are indeed enforceable penalties for crossing the line. copyright 1997. Electronic redistribution In whole permitted with correct attributions and without fee. Telecom Digest use in whole or in part permitted. All other rights reserved. onymouse@hypatia.com SPAM/Unsolicited commercial email is an unwanted expense. I think I should pass on the expense to the ones who imposed it on me and put an end to their free ride in my pocketbook. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I still say the best method is to financially ruin them by any means possible; usually this means using the toll free number they provide (sometimes) or as we will discover in another message in this issue, by requesting 'free samples'. Read on for more details in a later message. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 02:16:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: UUNET Pulling Peering Agreements; Now Charging? Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 22:46:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Gordon Cook Subject: UUNET Pulling Peering Agreements & replacing them with charging under non-disclosure? I have just had a phone call from a particpant in the news conference of the Well. What UUNET is doing to many of its peers, including the Well, is now clear. According to my caller, Dave Hughes, it has served notice to many if not most of its peers that, in late May and early June, it will either terminate their peering session or that the peers will have to start paying for the privilege. How much will be charged and under what conditions is unknown. Why? Because the unfortunate peers either have to **sign non disclosure agreements before** they even sit down with UUNET or simply be cut off. I first heard an opaque reference to this from a nationally known figure a couple of months ago. In the last ten days I have heard separately and privately from three different people one of whom is directly affected. I asked him to call me. He never did. Now I think I understand why. Hughes said that David (?) Hollub who is responsible for the Well's connectivity and has just been fired by Bruce Katz the well's owner has revealed in a well conference what UUNET is doing and that the story made it into the {Wall Street Journal} today. I will be sending Hughes a summary understanding of what I think this means that he will post on the Well inviting national journalists to call me for whatever information/insight I can give them into the story. I would especially like to begin hearing from those directly affected. Please detail very precisely what restrictions you place on the information you send me. First it was AGIS (but who cares about AGIS?). Now UUNET. Tomorrow who? MCI? As UUNET and others of the big five move to consolidate their markets ... let UUNET put the smaller national backbones against the wall and whom do the rest of ISP's have to rely on? Those ISPs who did not get hit in UUNET's first round of cuts. Will you get it in the neck in the second or the third round? The COOK Report on Internet For subsc. pricing & more than 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA ten megabytes of free material (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) visit http://cookreport.com/ Internet: cook@cookreport.com On line speech of critics under attack by Ewing NJ School Board, go to http://cookreport.com/sboard.shtml ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Another Spam With Free Samples Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 19:28:47 -0400 I received this today. Feel free to snip the content, but I thought I'd make digest readers aware of a toll free number that they want to be sure to call and ask for information and a free cassette. Now make sure to use your correct address when requesting your cassette, otherwise mail will be returned to sender after all that money for postage would have been spent. From: milteam@prodigy.net[SMTP:milteam@prodigy.net] Sent: Saturday, May 03, 1997 4:54 PM Subject: GUESS WHO'S SLEEPING IN YOUR BED ??? From: milteam@prodigy.net * * * * * You "MITE" Be Surprised! * * * * * * * * * Allergy sufferer's worst NIGHTMARE! * * * * [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Much nonsense about medical problems being cured by using an MLM approach to selling whatever product it is they are selling ... all deleted here; it went on for a couple thousand more lines. Now for the important part; and make sure you get all the details correct when you call the toll free number to order your free cassette tape. Following that, a look at the headers which came with this crap. PAT] ************************************** CALL NOW for your FREE cassette! TOLL-FREE (888)403-0307 24hrs. OR E-mail your Name, Address and Telephone Number w/area code: milteam@juno.com ************************************** P.S. With 1 (800) ordering -- no distributor sign-up fee -- no front loading -- no group volume requirements -- and reasonably priced, superior quality product line, its easy to see why we're the highest rated MLM company in history and one of the fastest growing young companies in the industry. --------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >From milteam@prodigy.net Sat May 3 15:51:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: from mail-gw2.pacbell.net (mail-gw2.pacbell.net [206.13.28.53]) by mrin46.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-1.0.1) with ESMTP id PAA00169; Sat, 3 May 1997 15:51:04 -0400 (EDT) From: milteam@prodigy.net Received: from David (whx-ca9-14.ix.netcom.com [205.187.202.110]) by mail-gw2.pacbell.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id MAA06600; Sat, 3 May 1997 12:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 12:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705031950.MAA06600@mail-gw2.pacbell.net> Subject: GUESS WHO'S SLEEPING IN YOUR BED ??? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You all know what needs to be done. I do not have to elaborate further. If you need a few cassette tapes, order as many as you want. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 May 1997 00:53:16 -0400 From: Jack Decker Subject: Review of Book on Long Distance Competition You might be interested in the article/review at this URL: http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg20n1r1.html The title is: "Phone Bill Too High? Blame the FCC." Subtitle: "The Failure of Antitrust and Regulation to Establish Competition in Long-Distance Telephone Services." ------------------------------ From: Ed Coglio Subject: Marconi 6200 Microwave Test Set For Sale Date: Sat, 02 May 1997 20:15:07 -0700 Organization: SatNet Marconi 6200 Microwave test set for sale: - color display - useable to 20 Ghz - TDR and frequency sweep capability - power meter and counter - 4 scalar inputs - can display 4 measurements simultaneously - includes 6581 cable test head and case - 6910 and 6230 power sensors - all interconnect cables - manual This instrument is in pristine condition and current calibration is good to August 97. Excellent for use by tower crew on new installs. As accurate as the HP network analyzer and much more transportable. Asking mid $30's. Serious inquiries only ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #110 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 5 00:45:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA20335; Mon, 5 May 1997 00:45:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 00:45:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705050445.AAA20335@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #111 TELECOM Digest Mon, 5 May 97 00:45:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 111 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Incredible Chutzpah (Nils Andersson) Re: Incredible Chutzpah (Stanley Cline) Re: Incredible Chutzpah (H. Peter Anvin) Re: Incredible Chutzpah (Michael Schuster) Re: Incredible Chutzpah (Andrew Moore) Re: Fiber/Copper Breakout or SLC? (Patton Turner) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Scott Nelson) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Michael Kagalenko) Re: Why Both 1+10 and 10 on my CID (Andy McFadden) Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet (John R. Levine) Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet (nwdirect@netcom.com) Re: Carte Blanche to Steal (John Cropper) Re: UUNET Pulling Peering Agreements; Now Charging? (Michael W. Coen) Last Laugh! How Many??? (Jim Weiss) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Incredible Chutzpah Date: 04 May 1997 17:28:48 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com In article , asherman@lehman.com (Andy Sherman) writes: > OK, now that we've had a good laugh, let's get serious! Can you > imagine the statue not having the authority to prevent implementation > of a deceptive trade practice? I would think this is easy -- compare > the consumer's intent in saying "I don't care" to the outcome if these > folks prevail. They are not the same, unless to add to the carrier > selection script "Do you mean 'I Don't Care' long distance service > from Scumbag Communications or do you mean that you don't care who > your carrier is?" I am not sure if it is deceptive. If somebody truly does not care, then he should be happy with whatever he gets. (On a lighter note, there is a possibly apocryphal story about a Nevada man who picked a vanity license plate number of NONE. His punishment was being mailed 358 notices about unpaid parking tickets. The rest of the story is left as an exercise.) Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Incredible Chutzpah Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 19:34:09 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com On 27 Apr 1997 08:40:34 -0400, in comp.dcom.telecom Andy Sherman wrote: > Did anybody else hear about this? I heard it as one of those Old news. *I* mentioned Dennis Dees' antics several months back. > It seems some relatively small LD carrier has applied to do business > in Florida under the trade names of "I Don't Care" and "It Doesn't > Matter". Presumably, if a subscriber gave either of those answers to > a LEC carrier selection request then Scumbag Communications (or The intent was to grab calls dialed to the LEC operator, where the caller answered "I don't know|care" for the name of the LD carrier to handle interLATA calls. I certainly don't think he'd try to take 1+ traffic -- that could be considered a form of slamming, IMHO. > Anybody heard what the final PSC action was on this? In Georgia, from what I understand, he dropped his application ... I don't think the current PSC would allow it. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! CLLI MRTTGAMA42G NPA 770 ** scline(at)mindspring.com mailto:roamer1(at)pobox.com ** http://www.pobox.com/~roamer1/ From/Reply-To may be changed -- NO SPAM! http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ ------------------------------ From: hpa@transmeta.com (H. Peter Anvin) Subject: Re: Incredible Chutzpah Date: 4 May 1997 21:25:56 GMT Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA Reply-To: hpa@transmeta.com (H. Peter Anvin) grumpy@en.com (Seymour Dupa) wrote: > I once head a person shanged his name to "None of the Above". He then > ran for political office. On the ballot, his name appeared ... Actually, it was "Absolutely Nobody" and he run for Lt. Governor of some state, I seem to remember Washington. hpa Always looking for a few good BOsFH. ** Linux - the OS of global cooperation I am Baha'i -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/ ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: Re: Incredible Chutzpah Date: 04 May 1997 19:03:29 -0400 In article , Andy Sherman wrote: > Did anybody else hear about this? I heard it as one of those > whimsical little pieces on the half-hour on NPR's Morning Edition a > couple weeks ago. That's almost as good as the company calling itself ATNT, who called AT&T subscribers to "confirm they wanted ATNT as their long distance carrier". Right. Mike Schuster | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM schuster@panix.com | schuster@mem.po.com ------------------------------ From: Andrew Moore Subject: Re: Incredible Chutzpah Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 11:58:58 -0400 Organization: Cornell University Hi there - I got wind of this a few months ago and I think I have the access codes to dial them direct -- I think they came off of alt.phreaking or somewhere and I haven't tried them, so you may get mixed results. I believe it goes like this: 1015016 - KT&T - owns the following: 1015136 - "I don't know" 1015137 - "It doesn't matter" 1015138 - "Whoever" 1015140 - "Anyone is OK" It sounds pretty weird to me too. Andrew Moore (remove the NOSPAM, unless spamming) ------------------------------ From: pmturner@mindspring.com (Patton Turner) Subject: Re: Fiber/Copper Breakout or SLC? Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 22:50:01 GMT Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc. Reply-To: pmturner@mindspring.com Pat Talbot wrote: > I am extending a network to a building about a quarter of a mile away > from my central facility via arial fiber (12 strand). I'm looking for > a box that will let me convert 50 or 100 copper pairs down to a single > fiber pair, and then convert back from fiber to the 50 or 100 copper > pairs on the far end. Does a SLC provide this functionality? > At the central site, we have a large PBX and would like to connect > phones at the far end using the above scenario. The far end currently > has a separate key system phone switch that I would like to eliminate > from our midst. :) A SLC (non I-SLCs at least) are designed to have a CO (COT) and a field end (ROT) and are customised for that application. It would work for your application, but plain D4 channel banks might be cheaper, and a bit more flexable. I would price the two methods. If you aren't going to need some multiple of 96 channels, I'll bet the D4s are cheaper. Pat ------------------------------ From: scott_d_nelson@rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Scott Nelson) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1997 13:36:32 GMT Organization: Alcatel Network Systems fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) wrote: > According to Dr Alan Harris from the Walter and Eliza Institute in > Melbourne: "This is important because at present, there was no convincing > evidence that radio fields (in contrast to X- and Gamma-rays, ultraviolet > and atomic radiation) can directly cause the changes in genes responsible > for cancer development." Thanks for the post, Stewart. I just wanted to focus on the above quote that I stripped from your article. As I understand it, medical scientists and physicists both agree on how high frequency radiation such as X- and Gamma-rays can have genetic affects, but I have seen no hypothesis on how low-frequency RF might affect biology. I am told that the general theoretical concensus is that low frequency RF only serves to manipulate cells *physically*. That is to say that they can cause physical movement or excitation of matter which -- as far as we know -- only results in the generation of heat. In other words, wireless communication could possibly fry your brain, but it won't cause cancer. Still, the energy required to do any significant physical damage like a microwave oven is way, way more than any wireless transmitter that cellular/PCS/GSM phone users would come in contact with -- including wireless base stations. Note that I prefixed some of my comments with "as I understand...", "I have seen...", and "I am told...". I in no way claim to be an authority here, so I would appreciate being corrected or supported. If there is any sound hypothisis to the contrary regarding low-frequency RF causing genetic mutation, I would like to hear of it. And, knowing how newsgroups can spawn more missinformation from rumor rather than fact, I would like to see solid references on any sources quoted. (In this regard, I commend you on your article.) *Scott Nelson work: scott_d_nelson@aud.alcatel.com* *Alcatel Network Systems home: nelson84@concentric.net* *Richardson, Texas phone: 972-996-5890 fax: 972-996-2778* ------------------------------ From: Michael Kagalenko Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 23:49:34 EDT Stewart Fist (fist@ozemail.com.au) wrote in article > This gets very little coverage in TELECOM Digest, for good > reason. Most of the studies are inconclusive. Not all, however. > This, I predict, is one of the most significant yet. > Cell phones/cancer connection. > by Stewart Fist > The Australian newspaper, Tues 29 April 1997 > A team of scientists funded by Telstra to investigate claimed links > between cellular phones and cancer has turned up probably the most > significant finding of an adverse health effects yet. > When presented to 'Science' magazine for publication the study was > rejected on the grounds that publication "would cause a panic". Three > other prominent magazines including 'Nature' also later rejected the > report, suggesting that they would not handle such important > conclusions without the research being further confirmed. This makes me a bit suspicious about the claims by S. Fist. As far as I am familiar with "Science" and "Nature," poor science is more likely reason for rejection then controversial nature of findings. Were those results published in any peer-reviewed journals? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Stewart Fist noted originally that 'very little coverage of the topic appears in TELECOM Digest' and the reason for that is I tend to toss out the articles on 'cancer caused by cell phones' without publishing them ... usually that is. The topic has come up here in the past, and each time around the consensus of several writers who really should know what they are talking about has been that this 'cancer' is hogwash. It is indeed a controversial topic and there are a number of people who beleive it to be true. I don't think I beleive it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden) Subject: Re: Why Both 1+10 and 10 on my CID Organization: Lipless Rattling Crankbait Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 19:56:49 GMT In article , Jeff Hollingsworth wrote: > In article Dave Yewell > writes: >> "dial 10 digits" which I assume are the ten digits which CID delivers >> and "dial 1+10 digits" >> Isn't all 10 digit dialing in the US "1+10"? The database we get from CCMI includes dialing pattern information, with separate entries for HL (home area code, local), HT (home, toll), FL (foreign area code, local), and FT (foreign, toll). There's one set for "allowed" dialing, and a second set for "permissive" dialing (well, PFT is assumed to be 1+10 everywhere). The database assigns single-letter codes to each exchange, where each letter represents a different combination of values. The current DB has 17 different sets. There are places where you are *required* to dial seven-digit numbers into different area codes. There's not much about dialing that I would call "standard" in the U.S. FWIW, I believe there was an exchange in Cananda that "went M" before Maryland did, but MD was the first in the U.S. to do so. The unpleasantly fascinating part is that there are places in the country where you get charged more for dialing 1+10 than you would for dialing seven, even though both connect you to the same place. So being able to dial fewer than 11 digits is an important feature for some areas. > As of Thursday most of the state of Maryland will be 10 digit dialing > for *all* local calls and 1+10 digit dialing for toll. Seven digit > dialing will no longer be permitted due to the pending start of area > code overlays. I assume that this box is designed with this feature > so it will work in MD too. > A side note, Bell Atlantic has been running a big media blitz to > prepare for this. We have been hearing lots of stories and reminders > about the need to reprogram (or upgrade) everything from FAX machines > to emergency phones in elevators. This was fairly interesting for WebTV, since the devices "learn" what patterns work by dialing the phone and watching what happens, using the CCMI data as a starting point. Of course, by this time all of the devices in Maryland had learned that 7-digit dialing worked great, which meant that we had to make the boxes un-learn that fact *before* May 1st. (After May 1st they'd have a hard time dialing in to be fixed. It's easy to straighten them out after the fact, but the goal was to keep things as seamless as possible.) Send UCE to consumerline@ftc.gov (Spam Bait) Send mail to fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden) Fight Internet Spam - http://www.vix.com/spam/ and news.admin.net-abuse.email ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 09:53:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. Sovernet is an interesting rural ISP. They cover the entire state of Vermont with local call access, even though Vermont has only one city big enough to deserve the name (Burlington), lots of small rural exchanges, and very high intra-state toll rates. They've cobbled together a network of POPs colocated in local computer stores and the like, along with a lot of remote call forwarding between neighboring towns to maximize the local access to each POP. Their rates are the same as everyone else's, in the vicinity of $20/mo. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ From: nwdirect@netcom.com Subject: Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 01:05:41 GMT Stanley Cline (roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com) wrote: > Re: (rural Internet access) There are now several ISPs that provide flat-rate, unlimited access service for around $19.95 via an 800 number. There is now no reason why everyone with a U.S. phone cannot have reasonably priced access. * Internet Access Providers - Web Presense Providers - BBSes * * http://www.thedirectory.org/ - largest directory on the web * * tens of thousands of listings - over 7,500 Access Providers * * Telephone Prefix Locations - "The BBS Corner" - Web Banner Creation * ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: Carte Blanche to Steal Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 18:39:31 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises Judith Oppenheimer wrote in article ... > FCC grants carriers carte blanche to steal what they've been buying. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You have illustrated a good point > Judith; just one more reason to let the big players do their own thing > and take your telecom needs to smaller companies who appreciate your > business. PAT] Unfortunately, Pat (and Judith) it is not always that simple. From personal experience, and that of close associates, I can tell you that AT&T (and sometimes Sprint) does not relinquish an 800/888 toll-free customer easily. I have had customers take up to a WEEK to provision from AT&T to another, smaller carrier (IXC, WilTel, LDDS, etc.), due to AT&T not processing the resporg paperwork upon receipt. They will stall, accumulating more receipts, and 'investigate why the paperwork has not been processed', before finally releasing the customer. In all cases, save one, the customers were current on their payable (in the one case the customer was 5 days late due to an accounting error). Judith, perhaps you can shed some light on this practice...? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would be good to hear what Judith has to say on this. Are you sure however that the stalling is due to thier imminent loss of the customer or is it just their nature -- as I suspect -- to stall and fumble around when processing any sort of order slightly more complicated than turning on routine long distance service? Taking a week to get something done is nothing new for those guys; sometimes it takes two or three weeks or longer to get the service turned on in the first place; a time when you would think they were anxious to please and placate a new customer. Also, as far as the status of an account is concerned and whether the payments are up to date, is that a valid reason to refuse to release a number? I had heard at one point some discussion that carriers would be able to refuse on that basis, but I was not aware of anything formal on the topic. Judith, speak up! PAT] ------------------------------ From: mwcoen@hooked.net (Michael W. Coen) Subject: Re: UUNET Pulling Peering Agreements; Now Charging? Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 18:16:50 GMT Organization: Whole Earth Networks News David Holub, CEO of Wenet/Hooked (www.wenet.net) was fired and there is tremendous discussion going on in the Well (www.well.com) and the Hooked proprietary newsgroups. Mr. Holub's handling of the UUNET negotiations were at odds with major shareholder Bruce Katz. Mr. Holub wanted to testify before the California PUC about the enormity of the issue UUNET is forcing. The peering agreements ISP's have with UUNET will be terminated over the next few months and ISP's must sign non-disclosure statements if they even wish to negotiate with UUNET. Many, if not all, small ISP's may be shuttered as they cannot afford the cost of peering agreements. UUNET is wholly-owned by Worldcom (www.worldcom.com). Even the Federal government will be forced to pay hefty fees for internet connectivity. Write your US Senator and ask for an investigation into Peering Agreements with UUNET and Worldcom. Here is a Yahoo listing of US Senators: http://www.yahoo.com/Government/Legislative_Branch/Senate/Senators/ Mike www.hooked.net/~mwcoen [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I cannot resist the temptation: Isn't it interesting that all the Yahoos are listed on Yahoo. PAT] ------------------------------ From: NBJimWeiss@aol.com (Jim Weiss) Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 12:03:23 EDT Subject: Last Laugh! How Many??? Thought you might enjoy this... Forwarded message: From: Just4Laughs@usa.net (Just 4 Laughs) Reply-to: Just4Laughs@usa.net To: Just4Laughs@usa.net Date: 97-05-02 22:34:50 EDT This, from Sandi Woodard and Jennifer-Ann Anderson, has run quite a bit on the Net, but we're running here for the benefit of those who haven't seen it yet ... Q: How many internet mail list subscribers does it take to effect the changing of a light bulb? A: 1,331: 1 to change the light bulb and to post to the mail list that the light bulb has been changed. 14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently. 7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs. 27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs. 53 to flame the spell checkers. 156 to write to the list administrator complaining about the light bulb discussion and its inappropriateness to this mail list. 41 to correct spelling in the spelling/grammar flames. 109 to post that this list is not about light bulbs and to please take this email exchange to alt.lite.bulb. 203 to demand that cross posting to alt.grammar, alt.spelling and alt.punctuation about changing light bulbs be stopped. 111 to defend the posting to this list saying that we are all use light bulbs and therefore the posts **are** relevant to this mail list. 306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique, and what brands are faulty. 27 to post URLs where one can see examples of different light bulbs. 14 to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly, and to post corrected URLs. 3 to post about links they found from the URLs that are relevant to this list which makes light bulbs relevant to this list. 33 to concatenate all posts to date, then quote them including all headers and footers, and then add "Me Too." 12 to post to the list that they are unsubscribing because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy. 19 to quote the "Me Too's" to say, "Me Three." 4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ. 1 to propose new alt.change.lite.bulb newsgroup. 47 to say this is just what alt.physic.cold_fusion was meant for, leave it here. 143 votes for alt.lite.bulb. ------------------------------------------------ Just 4 Laughs! FREE Humor To Your E-mail! About 4 e-mails per day, most every day. If you would like to receive Just 4 Laughs! Send an e-mail message to me or go to the Web site. Just4Laughs@USA.Net GO to http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Set/6993 ~~~~~~~~~~ Do you need another e-mail account? Go to the Just 4 Laughs Home Page, because there is a list of FREE e-mail programs. GO to http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Set/6993 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #111 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 7 01:04:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA12091; Wed, 7 May 1997 01:04:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 01:04:13 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705070504.BAA12091@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #112 TELECOM Digest Wed, 7 May 97 01:03:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 112 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 847 Reported to Need Relief 4Q97 (David W. Tamkin) Motorola May Take Legal Action Over Health Claims (Monty Solomon) ISDNworld Conference (Bob Larribeau) Book Review: "How the Internet Works" by Eddings (Rob Slade) Street Corner Web Browser Spotted in the Netherlands (Paul Houle) False 911 Calls (rweingar@newnorth.net) Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users (B. Allen) Employment Opportunity: Burlington MA Telecommunications (Jack Bryar) Re: BellSouth, Payphones and AOSlime (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: 847 Reported to Need Relief 4Q97 Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 13:43:36 CDT The Friday, May 2, Chicago _Sun-Times_ (nothing appeared about it in the Chicago _Tribune_) carried a front-page story that area code 847 is in bad shape and needs relief this coming fall. Two suggestions were a split roughly along the Des Plaines River (except that the south end of the split line would go west of the city of Des Plaines) and an overlay. The article stated that the split proposal did not say which side should keep 847. As we expect, the effect of an overlay was very poorly presented in the article. The poll question of the day was "Would you rather have an area code split or dial eleven digits for all calls?" and the article said that with an overlay all local calls would have to be "dialed as [not "like" but "as"] long-distance calls, but at a local charge." Except for the 312/773 line through Chicago, which has two area codes to itself, area code boundaries in Illinois do not divide municipali- ties. There is no way to split 847 without forcing many thousands of phone number changes where municipal borders vary from CO and exchange boundaries, though I should expect that the proposed split would not create any single area needing number changes as large as the 23,000 lines in southern Schaumburg that had to get new numbers when 847 was created early last year. At least the article did not blame beepers and faxes for the number crunch: it blamed the reservation of an entire prefix for each local service provider in each exchange. The Citizens Utility Board -- an organization that argues before the Illinois Commerce Commission and lobbies the state legislature against utility rate increases -- supports neither; they maintain that only about 29% of the actual telephone numbers in 847's existing prefixes are in use, and they want competing local providers to be assigned numbers in blocks of 1000 instead of in entire prefixes. That would get 847 out of jeopardy. Full number portability is supposed to be in place soon, and that will allow assigning numbers to providers in blocks of one. Blocks of 1000 would then be an adequate stopgap until portability (can't we call it something else?) is in full swing. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The _Chicago Tribune_ reported on this in the Tuesday paper. As you pointed out, the culprits named for the mess are the various competitors and their blocks of ten thousand numbers each. The Tribune article said most likely the 'east side' of 847 -- namely here in Skokie, Evanston and up the lakeshore -- would be getting the new code, while communities to the west and northwest would likely be the ones to keep 847. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 00:05:58 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola May Take Legal Action Over Health Claims Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 19.12 Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 07:14:23 -0400 From: "Mich Kabay [NCSA]" Subject: Motorola may take legal action over health claims In Australia, there's been quite a fuss over claims that cellular phones cause all manner of disease. Motorola responds: Phone giant may take legal action over health claims Australian Associated Press 29 Apr 1997 SYDNEY, April 29 AAP - In the wake of growing fears over mobile phone safety, industry giant Motorola has hinted it may take legal action over claims linking its products to brain cell damage, cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. The company's managing director Ron Nissan said today he had written to fledgling protection device manufacturer Microshield, seeking that it retract the claims made in its sales brochures. Key points made in the article: * Microshield announced its protective cell-phone shield in the third week of April. * "The device consists of a woven polyester and nickel casing, a PVC phone screen ingrained with ultra fine protective mesh and an adjustable polyester-coated aerial guard." * Device is described as blocking 90% of harmful emissions from the phones. * Advertising pamphlet claims that cell phones have been shown to cause "permanent brain cell damage, cancer cell growth acceleration and possible promotion of asthma conditions following exposure to microwave radiation at cellular phone frequencies". * Also claims that cell phones may cause Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. * Executive Director of the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA), Peter Russell, has written to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) to demand removal of this brochure. * ACCC will test Microshield claims using independent investigators. * Australian researchers announced yesterday that lab mice show higher incidence of lymphoma after exposure to cell phone radiation. M.E. Kabay, PhD, CISSP (Kirkland, QC), Director of Education National Computer Security Association (Carlisle, PA) http://www.ncsa.com ------------------------------ From: Bob Larribeau Subject: ISDNworld Conference Date: 6 May 1997 16:23:33 GMT Organization: InterNex Information Services 1-800-595-3333 The California ISDN Users' Group Spring ISDNworld conference will be held June 19 & 20 in San Diego. The conference will include tutorials, discussions of emerging technologies, and applications. There will also be an exhibition with 50 ISDN product and service companies participating. We will be hosting the North American ISDN Users' Forum on June 16 to 18 at the same location. The ISDNworld conference costs $295 if you register by May 23, $345 after. There is no charge to attend the exhibits. Take a look at http://www.isdnworld.com for complete information. Send your postal address to info@ciug.org if you would like a brochure mailed to you. Bob Larriibeau California ISDN Users' Group ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 10:59:54 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "How the Internet Works" by Eddings BKHINWRK.RVW 961216 "How the Internet Works", Joshua Eddings, 1994, 1-56276-192-7, U$24.95/C$34.95/UK#22.99 %A Joshua Eddings 72203.1434@compuserve.com %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1994 %G 1-56276-192-7 %I MacMillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$24.95/C$34.95/UK#22.99 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 218 %T "How the Internet Works" Most people will read the title of the book in terms of the overall and conceptual function of the net. In that sense the book works very well. The basic applications of the Internet are presented clearly and in a manner that aids in understanding. I am impressed Just in case, though, there may be those who think that the book shows you how to make the net work for you: how to use it. Sorry, the level of detail is not sufficient for that, nor is it intended to be. Most of the book, however, is quite accurate: surprisingly so given the "picture book" format. Almost the only quibble I have is with the first explanation of gopher, which presents a more potent type of agency than is actually the case. A fairly minor point in a whole book. (Even the section on viruses isn't bad.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKHINWRK.RVW 961216 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ From: Paul Houle Subject: Street Corner Web Browser Spotted in the Netherlands Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 09:26:27 -0400 Organization: Cornell University We went to the Netherlands a few weeks ago and found a street corner web browser in the middle of a bank of pay phones. It runs MSIE 3.0 and supports Java and Microsoft's limited version of Javascript but has Active X turned off. It costs about 6 US cents per minute to use and makes printouts for about 25 cents US. You pay for it with either a prepaid phone card you get from the post office or a 'chip card' which is some kind of smart card. I was quite impressed. For more information and photographs of the machine, go to URL http://www.msc.cornell.edu/~houle/sc/ ------------------------------ From: raw Subject: False 911 Calls Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 08:37:36 -0500 Organization: rtc Our 911 center is reporting "False 911 Calls". I've heard of cordless phones dialing 911 when their battery is discharged. Has anyone discovered any other unexpected / unexplained causes for these events, other than the obvious - (bad cable pair / trouble). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What about malicious people dialing 911 just to stir up a little action? Here in Skokie some fool was going through the train station several times per week late in the evening, dialing 911 then walking away and leaving the phone off hook or sometimes just hanging up and walking away. Of course every time this happened a police car would have to go there. I do not know if they ever caught him or not; the calls apparently stopped. In Chicago for many years prior to 911 when there was no convenient or easy way to trace false alarms, the Fire Department was plagued with false alarms -- sometimes a couple hundred per day. In many instances it was not so much a false alarm as it was a confused person giving the wrong address for a legitimate fire. We have many streets in Chicago with both a *north side* and *south side* of the city designation such as *North* Kedzie Avenue and *South* Kedzie Avenue; or *North* Cicero Avenue and *South* Cicero Avenue. So what was the Fire Department supposed to do when calls were received from someone who shouted hysterically into the phone, 'there is a fire at 1234 Kedzie Avenue' then hung up the phone to rush off to safety before the dispatcher could question the person 'is that 1234 North or 1234 South on Kedzie?' Since the addresses are a few miles apart, the dispatcher had to send out two squads; one to each side of town. Naturally one came back having done nothing. Most false alarms were recorded on the books as 'mistaken citizen trying to be helpful' unless specific malicious intent could be proven. The installation of 911 cut back greatly on that sort of incident once people were aware that they could be easily traced back to their phone and address. But still, payphones are used for these 'games' quite frequently. Another difficulty with calls to 911 from a pay phone where the caller hangs up is that so many payphones cannot receive incoming calls, consequently the dispatcher is unable to ring back the line in the hopes someone will answer and give even a brief description of the problem requiring police help. If there are going to be any future revisions in the 911 software I would like to see one which allows the 911 dispatcher to hold the line and ring back manually on it, the same way a telephone operator can hold up a line. For instance, a one way outgoing payphone never stopped the operator from ringing back to collect more money; she just never released the line to start with. I think 911 should be able to seize the line when a call comes in and not have to rely on dialing back to the caller for more details, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bradley Ward Allen Subject: Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users Date: 06 May 1997 22:47:27 -0400 Reply-To: ulmo@armory.com > Access fees [to reach long distance companies] are a virtual "gravy > train" for local phone companies, [...] > But drastic changes could "blow up basic telephone service for > everyone," said Roy Neel, president of the U.S. Telephone > Association. [...] Hmm. I don't get this: In NYC, local NYNEX service (which often costs more than long distance bills) would get more expensive. Ok. Then MFS Intelenet, Teleport, Avis Rent-A-Car, AT&T Wireless, Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobile, Omnipoint, and NextWave's resellers will be more competitive in the local phone market. More competition. Quicker progression in the charging chess game, leading to lower prices. Where does the consumer lose? Is this another case of protecting the old grandma who doesn't need cellular service? > He points out that access charges have dropped ever since the break-up > of AT&T in 1984, but that the average residential user hasn't always > benefited. Business users and high-volume residential customers have > saved, [...] Can someone compare their 1983 NYC bill to mine? I am a high-volume residential customer and my monthly local bill (without long distance and ISDN charges) is about $140 per month. Add in ISDN used for POTS-type service, and suddenly the cost is more like $180/month. Wish those charges went towards my cellular ($140/mo), ISP ($140/mo) and long distance ($60/mo -- most of which is local toll-free) bills as well (i.e., make them less). I don't even have cable (how can I afford it?) Honestly, I believe that the services I use cost a lot of money, but I feel $200/month to be a lot of money and it is probably sufficient for fiber to the home *and* an unlimited-use cell phone. I feel it is all an issue of costing, products, and integration, so this discussion I feel is entirely appropriate. (Saw a Hylan fiber splicing truck on 6th Ave today. Bet it would be cheaper if there was more fiber to maintain.) > The es[s]oteric nature of the dispute hasn't kept the local and > long-distance companies from boiling it down to simplistic arguments > that are being pushed in advertising and public relations campaigns > on the airwaves, in print media and over the Internet. I think my arguments are midway between simplistic and essoteric and am sure my economics on the issue make me look like a kindergartener. So what can I say? They don't teach this stuff in elementary school where it belongs! So I never learned it. > [...] Neel, of the local phone company trade group, angrily calls > MCI's arguments "a bare-faced lie." Neel said the access charges > help make up the difference in higher-cost areas as well as > residential service. The true cost of providing residential local > service is about $35 a month, [...] God do I wish! I'd be estatic to pay DOUBLE (so they make 100%)!!!!! > twice the average phone bill, Neel said. Oh God. I'm that unaverage? Well, my attitude is charge them for what they're using. If they don't need to pay $50 per month for phone service, then they don't need it, and can use a payphone or get a cellular phone at $25 per month for those emergency calls (likely to go down soon; or free for the 911 calls). > And without access fees companies would have to charge more, a lot > more in rural areas, for service. That's what it costs to live in rural areas. So live in the city where there are subways which are much better for the natural environment. The welfare for light suburbs and rural areas is unnecessary. Are you saying my $0.80 apple will go up to $0.90 because of this? Fine, I'll pay $0.10 more for my apple. > But others estimate the true cost of phone service to be much less. I'm not trying to steal telecommunications. But cutting it to one third of what I pay now would help my life and my productivity in this world immensely. > While it may be expensive to provide service in rural areas, it costs > about $15 to $20 a month in areas such as Nassau County and $5 a month > in central business districts, estimates David Gabel, associate > professor of economics at Queens College. In addition, local phone > companies making such estimates don't take out of the local bill the > costs of providing long-distance calls. More competiton in the > marketplace should also drive down costs for local service and access > fees, Gabel said. "Where do you see high customer access fees? > ... When you have monopolies," he said. Some who have studied the > issue propose a more radical solution of eliminating any access fees > as well as any subsidy to local phone service. That will drive > long-distance rates down by 25 percent to 30 percent, said Robert > Crandall, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Wait, so this means that the higher density urban areas where people move to have higher cost efficiencies for services in exchange for paying a premium rent, in the arena of telecommunications are actually paying greater amounts because of the higher perceived income in the area and the money-grubbing tendencies of monoplistic telecommunications entities, and thus subsidising a two-pronged rural and suburban contingent and a large profit-making business. Fights of monopolies finally aside (that's what this is majorly about after all), I protest the fact that *anybody* thinks I ought to subsidize the horrible lifestyles of non-urban folk. > "Virtually every economist agrees that we've made a mess of telephone > charges," Crandall said. The extra five-cents-a-minute in access > charges that consumers pay is clearly suppressing the demand for > long-distance calls, Crandall argues. He argues that regulators > should stop distorting the market and get out of the way particularly > because phone companies are facing new competitors and moving away > from monopoly systems. He points to lower prices that came to the > airline and trucking industry with deregulation, suggesting that it > could be duplicated in the telephone industry. And not jeporadize safety. I'd rather regulate airlines and not phone companies, honestly. (Maybe there's a connection: cheaper long distance calling rates means less traveling to have to be done (and better for the environment).) I actually agree with this paragraph significantly, but maintain that some regulation should exist in terms of some requirements such as banning false advertisement, requiring them to accept customers who pay the charges, listing all charges before being charged in reasonable amount of time for customer to react in a pratical way, and some solid antimonopoly measures (perhaps actually *banning* the largest companies from taking more than X-percent of the market, say 30% (including rural areas -- radios can go a long way today (and could for a while)), and disallowing them to band together with the "other" companies), etc. Wish I ran NYNEX. With my peculiar backround, I'd actually push for laws banning more than 30% ... [market share per area] Yeah, actually, one of the only market-size cost-setting type laws (rather than fairness laws such as true advertising, notification of costs, allowing people to buy services, etc.) I think is appropriate, for *all* telecommunications (Cable, Fiber, Radio) is a market-share-percentage law. We are solidly after the age where we need to have monopolies ANYWHERE. Yes, I know, that means there have to be 4 (count them, 4) radio antennas to BoHumTum, SomeState, so their 5 telecommunications-purchasing residents can be broken up accordingly among various companies (with two on one and one each on three). The competition between the companies will be fierce enough for that 2nd subscriber on their line and those borderline purchasers that they will try to make their service more worthwhile. Meanwhile, they won't mind servicing BoHumTum since they are, indeed, charging what it costs to provide service. The other 15 people who yacked all day long on the phone who can't afford it anymore can move to the city. Yes, that's precisely how I feel about it. (Is 4 companies enough? An exemption where there are fewer than 4 customers can be made, where each customer must choose a different company. Area would be defined as ... oh god, an acre? Or a square mile? How does that sound? It needs to be small enough that 4 companies' equipment would be close enough to customers in that area that there is incentive to compete.) See? I'm an awesome regulator. There must be forces in motion I don't understand ... else it would be regulated like I'd want it ... [umm, I'm pretending stupid.] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 16:20:44 -0400 From: Jack Bryar Subject: Employment Opportunity: Burlington MA Telecommunications Individual, Inc. Editorial Department Telecommunications, Datacommunications Editorial Positions Evening, half time positions. Telecommunications position: Requires knowledge/of familiarity with * The telecommunications regulatory environment * Common (uncommon) telecom terms Datacommunications position: Requires knowledge of / familiarity with * Datacommunications protocols * Networking hardware * The major players in the datacommunications market Members of the editorial review staff work out of our Burlington, Massachusetts office. Responsibilities include final story selection and story editing of our topic library each evening. An optimal position for free-lance technology writers, technical research professionals, or independent consultants specializing in communications technology. See us at http://www.newspage.com call Jack Bryar at 800-766-4224 for more information or send resumes to: jbryar@individual.com subject: JOB-OFFER J.V. "Jack" Bryar Editorial Manager for Datacommunications and Multimedia Individual, Inc. Voice: 1-800-766-4224 x 642 International: 1-617-313-5642 email:jbryar@individual.com http://www.newspage.com http://www.individual.com If at first you don't succeed... skydiving is not for you. ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: BellSouth, Payphones and AOSlime Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 15:03:27 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com On Thu, 01 May 1997 17:40:09 -0500, Pat wrote: > a COCOT outside their place of business. They asked my advice on how > it should be programmed, and actually took my advice. I think it provides > pretty decent service, and it seems to be getting a lot more business Given the fact that *you*, the editor of TELECOM Digest, gave the advice, I'm not surprised at all. :) > for the first minute and fifty cents per minute after that. Area 809 > and its various split-offs are all blocked -- calls not allowed. NPA 787 -- Puerto Rico -- *should* be allowed, and charged at US domestic rates. Too many COCOT owners block 787 thinking 787 = 809 or 664 or some other scam NPA, when that's not the case! (The same should hold for 340 USVI, and 671 Guam when calls become rated as intraNANP rather than international.) > Calls to 800/888 are allowed at no charge, although the owner will be > compensated eventually at whatever rate is decided. The phone is In my experience, 888 is *BY FAR* the single biggest blemish against COCOT owners. As I note in my COCOT Web-Wall of Shame (on my web site at http://www.mindspring.com/~scline/payphone/shame.html) there are NUMEROUS COCOT *sleaze* in the Atlanta area [and other places] that either block NPA 888 altogether, or worse -- CHARGE "TOLL" RATES FOR 888 NUMBERS! I have complained REPEATEDLY to some of these COCOT sleaze with either no or rather belligerent responses, and have finally started referring the sleaze to the FCC and state regulators. One convenience store chain/COCOT owner went as far as to block an *800* number which is a backup to an *888* calling card access number. When I called that company, the "phone person" was fairly rude and said they were waiting on the *FCC* to provide rate tables! Of course, the FCC doesn't distribute rate tables to COCOT owners [the phone manufacturers, such as Intellicall and Elcotel, usually do], and why is NPA 888 not in the phones' chips OVER A YEAR AFTER THE NPA TOOK EFFECT? I think Judith would have something to say about THAT! > billing methods include 1-800-CALL-ATT, 1-800-AMERITECH (for > calling card calls) and 1-800-COLLECT via MCI. "You may if you The hidden number everyone forgets: 1-800-210-CARD for LEC calling card calls, via Sprint. > Finally -- and this to me is sort of a class act -- the COCOT > speed dial positions (*0 through *9) are programmed with 'public > service' numbers all operating free or for 25 cents each. For > example one speed dial position dials the RTA/CTA Transit Inform- > ation service 'to recieve public transit schedule information > for this location'; another speed dial position connects to the > local taxicab service; a third connects to a time-of-day/weather > message and another one to 'report problems with this phone.' That's a lot better than some of the COCOT sleaze (Roth) in New Orleans that offer horoscopes from their phones. :) > I can't help but think that much of the bum rap COCOTS have received > in the past has been due to the ignorance of their owners in setting > them up properly. In this case, the company which put it in told the Absolutely! Many COCOT operators [and even independent LECs] aren't very familiar with the NANP or telephony issues in general, and are probably clueless; others are deliberately trying to fleece the public by blocking 888, overcharging for 0+ intraLATA, etc. A few COCOT owners have been in trouble with the FCC and/or state regulators REPEATEDLY -- in a few cases over a period of FIVE OR MORE YEARS! That shows a rogue attitude -- and a request for disconnection. :) > what he wanted on the phone, so he asked me. I think if more COCOT > owners would genuinely make an effort to *compete* with the local > telco payphones, they would be amazed at the results. On his behalf I agree. The *ethical* COCOT owners (rare, but there are a few around) are certain to do better than the typical COCOT owners (who either need a big clue or are scum.) In fact, *I*'ve thought of getting in the COCOT business on and off for several years, if for no other reason than to put other, sleazy operators to shame. > to any-555-1212 for seventy-five cents. I think the guy who owns > the shop where it is located is going to see some nice $$$ from it, > in a legitimate way. PAT] I agree there too. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! CLLI MRTTGAMA42G NPA 770 ** scline(at)mindspring.com mailto:roamer1(at)pobox.com ** http://www.pobox.com/~roamer1/ From/Reply-To may be changed -- NO SPAM! http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I will mention to him about 787 and the others you named. I doubt they can be part of the three minutes for one dollar however; the default carrier is AT&T and those area codes you named cost more than that. Probably they could be in the Canada rates of two dollars for the first minute. I have thought about getting into COCOTS myself, if anyone in the business is looking for a good sales rep in this area. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #112 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 8 08:31:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA21690; Thu, 8 May 1997 08:31:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 08:31:28 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705081231.IAA21690@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #113 TELECOM Digest Thu, 8 May 97 08:30:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 113 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Approves Landmark Overhaul of Phone Charges (Monty Solomon) 911 and Payphones (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: False 911 Calls (John Nagle) Re: False 911 Calls (Sanjay Parekh) Dial `2' For Grandma (Tad Cook) Hearing on 212, 917 Relief (John Cropper) Explanation Wanted of Wiretap Rules (Dean Webb) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 7 May 1997 22:29:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Approves Landmark Overhaul of Phone Charges Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM FYI. From Reuters. FCC approves landmark overhaul of phone charges May 7, 1997 2:09 PM EDT By Roger Fillion WASHINGTON (Reuter) - Regulators Wednesday approved a sweeping overhaul of domestic telephone charges that they said will lower costs for residential and business customers who make a lot of long-distance calls. Federal Communications Commimssion officials said basic local phone rates will stay the same. But consumers and businesses will pay more for extra phone lines and may see their bills rise if they make few long-distance calls. The FCC also voted to set aside about $2.3 billion a year to wire the nation's schools and libraries to the Internet at discounted rates. Another $400 million a year will be used to connect rural hospitals to the global computer network. The new rates mean residential customers with one phone line will see their long-distance bill drop to $20.65 a month from $22.50 by 1998, on average, according to FCC calculations. ``This is the single best day that business and residential customers have had since the (1984) breakup of AT&T,'' said FCC Chairman Reed Hundt. The overhaul also will: -- Keep the monthly ``subscriber line charge'' customers pay to the local phone company at $3.50. -- Boost the line charge for residential customers with more than one line to $5 a month from $3.50, and to more than $7.50 from $6 for multi-line businesses. Those increases will take effect next year and be followed by additional rises that ultimately will be capped at $9. -- Impose a new monthly charge on long-distance carriers that is expected to be passed on to customers. The charge will be $1.50 a line for multi-line residential customers and $2.75 a line for businesses with more than one line. -- Reduce by $1.7 billion the $23 billion in annual charges long-distance carriers pay local companies to access their networks, effective July 1. -- Reduce access charges by a total of $18.5 billion over the next five years. AT&T Corp. has promised to pass on the savings in access charges to customers through long-distance price cuts of 5 percent to 15 percent. Other long-distance carriers have signaled they will follow suit. Phone companies gave the rate overhaul mixed ratings. AT&T generally praised the plan, but No. 2 long-distance carrier MCI Communications Corp. said the access charge reductions did not go far enough. Regional phone compannies Bell Atlantic Corp. and Nynex Corp., which are merging, questioned the access-charge rate cut. Industry analysts, meanwhile, also offered mixed views. ``There was a lot of huffing and puffing, but this is incremental change and not revolutionary change,'' said Scott Cleland of Schwab Research Group. ) Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 12:31:11 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: 911 and Payphones > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What about malicious people dialing > 911 just to stir up a little action? Here in Skokie some fool was > going through the train station several times per week late in the > evening, dialing 911 then walking away and leaving the phone off hook > or sometimes just hanging up and walking away. Of course every time > this happened a police car would have to go there. I do not know if > they ever caught him or not; the calls apparently stopped. In Chicago > for many years prior to 911 when there was no convenient or easy way > to trace false alarms, the Fire Department was plagued with false > alarms -- sometimes a couple hundred per day. In many instances it > was not so much a false alarm as it was a confused person giving the > wrong address for a legitimate fire. A few years back, here in New Orleans, the city was going to fine businesses or impose a surcharge on false alarms from burglar alarm or fire alarm systems when the 'official' police or fire department (or one of the other law enforcement jurisdictions) answered the call. As for false calls to 911, a few months back, I seem to remember that the city's 911 system was *NOT* going to send out a police car to investigate if the 'hang-up' call came from a payphone. Just as in other major metro areas, here in New Orleans, fools or kids dial 911, usually from payphones, just for the sick 'fun' of it. > We have many streets in Chicago with both a *north side* and *south > side* of the city designation such as *North* Kedzie Avenue and > *South* Kedzie Avenue; or *North* Cicero Avenue and *South* Cicero > Avenue. So what was the Fire Department supposed to do when calls > were received from someone who shouted hysterically into the phone, > 'there is a fire at 1234 Kedzie Avenue' then hung up the phone to rush > off to safety before the dispatcher could question the person 'is that > 1234 North or 1234 South on Kedzie?' Since the addresses are a few > miles apart, the dispatcher had to send out two squads; one to each > side of town. Naturally one came back having done nothing. Most false > alarms were recorded on the books as 'mistaken citizen trying to be > helpful' unless specific malicious intent could be proven. Again, ditto for New Orleans. We have a lot of same-name streets, but with North and South designations. There is a 300 block of North and a 300 block of South . New York City has their "East Street" and "West Street", as well as "Avenues" with numericals from 'First' thru (I think) 'Twelth'. Miami has a grid system and NE/NW/SE/SW, with numerical names for *different* "streets" and "avenues". Considering that these are urban/inner-city metro areas, even if the caller to 911 is coherent and correct in identifying their location, the dispatch operators frequently seem to be illiterates/incompetents ... probably even people who are on political patronage and can't have anything done to reprimand/discipline/etc. them. Remember the fiasco in Atlanta during the Olympics last Summer with the calls to 911, and the incompetent 911 dispatch operators! :( :( :( > The installation of 911 cut back greatly on that sort of incident > once people were aware that they could be easily traced back to their > phone and address. But still, payphones are used for these 'games' > quite frequently. Another difficulty with calls to 911 from a pay > phone where the caller hangs up is that so many payphones cannot > receive incoming calls, consequently the dispatcher is unable to > ring back the line in the hopes someone will answer and give even > a brief description of the problem requiring police help. If there > are going to be any future revisions in the 911 software I would like > to see one which allows the 911 dispatcher to hold the line and > ring back manually on it, the same way a telephone operator can > hold up a line. For instance, a one way outgoing payphone never > stopped the operator from ringing back to collect more money; she > just never released the line to start with. I think 911 should be > able to seize the line when a call comes in and not have to rely > on dialing back to the caller for more details, etc. PAT] Pat, most (if not all) 911 systems out there today *CAN* hold the line and trunk, just as most *real telco* operators can (i.e. TSPS/TOPS/OSPS, and also the old cordboards as well). The only problem with payphones and many not allowing incoming calls is that the public phone equipment out there today is *COCOT*. The loop from the COCOT to the central office would be held by the 911 dispatch center, but the COCOT has either no ringer, or the ringer is turned off! :( The 911 dispatch center can press ring-backward all they want, but the people near the COCOT don't hear anything, or the 'ringer' inside of the COCOT is a low-volume electronic warbler which can't really be heard in a noisy location. Also, many COCOTs don't connect the handset to the loop upon going offhook, until the chips have processed an outgoing number. There would be no voicepath connection from the handset, even if someone did pick the handset up again if the 911 center were trying to ring-backward to the COCOT. Sometimes, there there would be a connection from the loop to *only the receiver* part of the handset. The microphone/transmitter would initially be 'turned-off' (i.e., as if there was no 'sidetone'), therefore, while the person at the payphone *knew* that 911 was calling back, the person at the payphone couldn't be heard by the 911 center. :( This is similar to many PBX systems and cellular systems. The trunk (loop) that the PBX uses to place outgoing calls is the number that the 911 center would have show up on their computer, *NOT* the actual incoming number of the telephone on an employee's desk or in the hotel room. The 911 center could hold the outgoing loop, but the PBX had already disconnected the extension from that loop if they had hung-up. Of course, many PBX systems today are enhanced enough to be more compatible with 911 systems, or at least send out the actual extension's incoming 7/10 digit number on calls to 911. Some cellular systems might send the actual cellular phone number to the 911 center on such calls, however, on cellular, if the battery began to cut out, or the caller moved too far away from a cellsite antennae, or they turned their phone off, the 911 center wouldn't be able to ring-backward to the calling cellphone. Some cellular systems (although not all) can 'try' to get the proper jurisdiction's 911 center depending on what cellsite the caller is picked up in, and try to match which city/municipality/township/parish/county/state/etc. political jurisdiction's 911 or emergency services are being requested. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: False 911 Calls Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 16:40:49 GMT TELECOM Digest Editor Noted: > Another difficulty with calls to 911 from a pay > phone where the caller hangs up is that so many payphones cannot > receive incoming calls, consequently the dispatcher is unable to > ring back the line in the hopes someone will answer and give even > a brief description of the problem requiring police help. If there > are going to be any future revisions in the 911 software I would like > to see one which allows the 911 dispatcher to hold the line and > ring back manually on it, the same way a telephone operator can > hold up a line. For instance, a one way outgoing payphone never > stopped the operator from ringing back to collect more money; she > just never released the line to start with. I think 911 should be > able to seize the line when a call comes in and not have to rely > on dialing back to the caller for more details, etc. PAT] I had to read up on E911 systems once, and as I understand it, the call remains up until the dispatcher releases it. That's a feature specified in the spec, as I recall. Remember, E911 works a lot like LD; the lines to the E911 center are normally 4-wire toll trunks, not subscriber-type lines. Historically, it was done that way because E911 was implemented back when end offices were still largely electromechanical but the AT&T toll switches were programmable. So E911 was originally implemented in the toll switches, not the end office switches. This gave the E911 center many of the powers of an operator, including the ability to hold a call up. However, it's quite possible that some COCOTs are programmed so that once you hang up, you can't pick up the handset and continue, regardless of the state of the line. John Nagle ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 13:04:01 -0400 From: Sanjay Parekh Subject: Re: False 911 Calls > a brief description of the problem requiring police help. If there > are going to be any future revisions in the 911 software I would like > to see one which allows the 911 dispatcher to hold the line and > ring back manually on it, the same way a telephone operator can > hold up a line. For instance, a one way outgoing payphone never > stopped the operator from ringing back to collect more money; she > just never released the line to start with. I think 911 should be > able to seize the line when a call comes in and not have to rely > on dialing back to the caller for more details, etc. PAT] Looks like its time for me to stop lurking and thrown my two cents in. I was recently out in Japan working with our stuff and a DMS-10J. Apparently in Japan there is this kind of functionality. They have a specialized trunk called a FPT (fire/police trunk) on which the operator gets total control of your line if you call. Once you call, they can ring you back, keep the line open, etc. until they decide to release your line. And the ring back is distinct in that there is no cadence, just a continual ring (I think..). I would have thought we would have that kind of functionality but I guess not ... | Sanjay Parekh | | | Systems Engineer - Cornerstone | sanjay.parekh@arris-i.com | | Arris Interactive | phone: 770-622-8627 | | Atlanta, GA | | ------------------------------ Subject: Dial `2' For Grandma Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 12:24:44 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Published Wednesday, May 7, 1997,in the {San Jose Mercury News}. Dial `2' for grandma By Charles McDowell LAST WEEK Maryland became the first state in which all telephone calls, even one to a next-door neighbor, require the dialing of an area code. Virginia and several other states are expected to acknowledge very soon the same irritating surge of progress. The growing number of traditional telephones, along with cellular phones, pagers, fax machines, answering machines, computer lines and assorted conference-call systems, will make 10 digits the standard for phone numbers. Ten digits are something to think about, especially if you are old enough to remember when three or four digits were enough to sustain telephonic communication in most towns of the United States. I still remember a batch of three-digit telephone numbers from a boyhood in small-town Virginia. And I will confess, indeed, that I remember when my grandparents in Lawrenceburg, Ky., had the telephone number 2. Yes, just 2. That was in the 1930s. Now in the late 1990s, I am sobered to have seen telephone numbers progress through the range from one to 10 digits. This reflects some progress in the communications system, but it also reflects some losses. We have lost "Central," who said "Number please," when we picked up the telephone. She was reassuring, helpful and hopeful as we adapted to an awesome innovation in our lives. My parents and brother and I used to spend summers with my maternal grandparents on the farm in Kentucky. I remember going with my grandfather one day to his law office in Lawrenceburg. In the afternoon, I got bored and tried to call my grandmother at the farm to come and get me. The operator said: "Number please." I said: "Two, please." The operator said: "If you're calling Mrs. Feland, she and her neighbor Mrs. Sherwood are at the A&P. They've tried to call Mr. Feland but he was on the phone with some lawyer in Frankfurt. Anyway, the message is that they are coming by the office and will drive you back to the farm because that young Jersey cow just had a calf." Anyway, the operator as friend and positive meddler is just about gone. The modern caller and high technology dial up the numbers and all the rest of it, and Americans in tune with the times have several lines into home and office, a pager in their pocket and a cell-phone and maybe a cell-fax in the car. And Americans lead the enthusiasts for all of it. In recent years, the symbol of the communications revolution has been cell-phones -- tens of millions of them added to the power of America in all their wireless glory amid the traffic jams. I personally am still trying to learn how to hunch my shoulder properly to steer, operate the other controls, honk the horn at idiots and hear the phone and all the wisdom in it. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Having found out just yesterday in the papers here that we in 847 are due for another splint in a few months, your article about phone number '2' was very nostalgic for me. I remember very well phone numbers of one through four digits in length all handled manually. As I think I mentioned the other day, the Amoco Oil Refinery PBX in Whiting, Indiana was number 2111. The mayor of Whiting had 1, the Commonwealth Edison generating station was 6, a Walgreen's Drug Store was 89, and Western Union was of course, 4321. Those were long-ago times. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Hearing on 212, 917 Relief Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 05:33:22 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises From the NY PSC: As the next steps in the process, parties will be authorized to submit comments that critique New York Telephone's reports and propose alternate arrangements for long-term relief for the 212 and 917 area codes. Comments will be due May 12, 1997, and reply comments will be due June 2, 1997. Thereafter, a collaborative conference will be held on June 16, 1997, at which I hope the parties will be able to reach some degree of consensus. The nature of any further proceedings will depend on the outcome of that collaborative conference. In addition, after reviewing the May 12 comments, I will evaluate the need, if any, for task forces or other fact-finding measures. Contemporaneously with these events, a public input process will be under way in which we attempt to ascertain the views of the public at large regarding the matters at hand. The times and places of the public statement hearings are under consideration and will be announced shortly. Note: Just a reminder that Bell Atlantic (NYNEX) wants an overlay, and CLECs prefer a split ... John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 http://www.lincs.net/ The latest compiled area code information is available from us! NPAs, NXXs, Dates, all at http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ ------------------------------ From: Dean Webb Subject: Explanation Wanted on Wiretap Rules Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 13:32:33 -0500 I am interested in finding information concerning the monitoring of various forms of telecommunications, including but not limited to, telephone conversations, modem traffic, network traffic inside a corporate office, network traffic in transit between offices (either those of the same company or of another's), and so on. How are the rules different for individuals, corporations, and government/law enforcement agencies? Which states require all parties to be aware that monitoring is taking place and which states stipulate that only one party need know? What I'm driving at is an issue whether or not everything that goes over my company's data/voice connection is treated the same. Rules regarding wiretaps on voice connections seem to be at least articulated in most jurisdictions, but do they extend to other forms of telecoms? I ask this also because such information would be important to corporations devising security policies in which they attempt to monitor employees' electronic communications. I am not concerned with the ethical nature of monitoring communications in this set of questions: I'm involved in a discussion on that topic on another list. What I am after is either directions on getting relevant legal information or the legal information itself with information on verifying it. I would greatly appreciate any replies and I intend to eventually make this information available to one and all, but especially so to those who "chip in" their 20,000 microdollars (roughly two cents' worth). Free speech while supplies last, Dean Webb ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #113 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 8 09:02:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA24202; Thu, 8 May 1997 09:02:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 09:02:11 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705081302.JAA24202@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #114 TELECOM Digest Thu, 8 May 97 09:02:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 114 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Stewart Fist) What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Jack Decker) Re: Utah Delays 801 Relief Three Months (Linc Madison) Digital Telecommunications Conference at UC Berkeley (dobson@berkeley.edu) Telephone Testimony in the McVeigh Okla Bombing Case (William Franklin) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 8 May 1997 22:01:26 +1000 From: fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study I received a large number of direct contacts from this article, and there were a couple of postings on TD. I'll try to deal with them all in one hit: Michael Kagalenko (mkagalen@lynx.dac.neu.edu) writes: > This makes me a bit suspicious about the claims by S. Fist. As far as > I am familiar with "Science" and "Nature," poor science is more likely > reason for rejection then controversial nature of findings. Were those > results published in any peer-reviewed journals? The most outstanding thing about the Adelaide Hospital study is that it is extraordinarily difficult to make any of this kind of "poor science" mud stick. The results were published last week in 'Radiation Research'. The study was funded by Telstra, which, as a GSM carrier, has a lot to lose from the tumour-promotion findings. The original team was led by Dr Michael Repacholi, who is well known as promoter of the industry's "Cell phones are safe" claim (now at WHO). And the research was conducted by three top Australian scientists, using a supervised protocol established by a supervisory committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). The main scientists insisted on this because of Telstra's involvement. I can't think of any research in the last decade which is so obviously unassailable in terms of the research protocols, the conduct, the mice numbers, or the findings. A doubling of tumours in 100 exposed mice, is not an insignificant finding. In fact, statistically, it is above the 1% level of confidence, and is therefore highly significant. Anyone interested in pursuing this matter further will find considerable material on this and other research at my site , together with a bibliography. I wish I hadn't mentioned the tortoise-like reaction of the journals because that is a minor side issue and it has detracted from the real point -- the now-well-established link between TDMA cell-phone radiations and tumour promotion. This is not an isolated case as anyone who has been following this debate would know. There are numerous studies over the years linking radio frequencies with DNA changes, tumour promotion, and sundry other adverse health effects. But publication on such a controversial subject has its problems (except in tabloids), and there's woeful ignorance in the wireless industry as to how much work is being done, and how strong are the findings. I'll bet few Digest readers know about Drs Lai and Singh, who found single- and double-strand DNA breaks after two hours of microwave exposure (in 1994, 95 and 96). Why not? It was a dramatic discovery, of vital importance to the radio industry. Then what about Drs Chou and Guy who exposed rats for two years at cell phone levels and found 3.5 times the number developed tumours; Dr Sarkar who found significant DNA (mutagenic) changes with low levels of exposure; or Dr Cleary who has been reporting tumour promotion for as long as I can remember. Where is the wireless-technology discussion on these matters? Then such dramatic discoveries as those which show dangers for glaucoma sufferers from corneal ulcers because of an interaction between the radiation and the drugs (Kues from 1985 and Monahan 1988), and a life-time of work (over 800 papers) by Dr Ross Adey, most of which deals with possible biological mechanisms. My original training was as an eye specialist, so I take the corneal, retinal and long-term cataract promotion findings seriously -- although I believe the incidence is probably low. But remember, even 1% of 100 million users, is reasonably significant. There's a lot of confusion and some conflict (scientific and political) in all of this research, some of it deliberately generated by the industry and some by the activists, especially those opposing towers. But that's par for the course in any medical controversy with political, economic and social implications. After all, when did you decide that the case against cigarettes had been proved. Do you believe the passive smoking evidence yet? What about sick-building syndromes? (The tobacco companies invented this last one themselves.) Some radio-health research has been conducted at the wrong frequencies, some at too high power levels, a lot is epidemiological which is less controllable than laboratory work -- but lab work is rarely on human subjects. Depite all that, the vast majority of findings point in one direction. There are probably serious long-term problems (probably low possibility, high potential in nature) Haven't you read about this? No? You should ask yourself: Why not? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Stewart Fist noted originally that > 'very little coverage of the topic appears in TELECOM Digest' and > the reason for that is I tend to toss out the articles on 'cancer > caused by cell phones' without publishing them ... usually that is. > The topic has come up here in the past, and each time around the > consensus of several writers who really should know what they are > talking about has been that this 'cancer' is hogwash. It is indeed > a controversial topic and there are a number of people who beleive > it to be true. I don't think I beleive it. PAT] Pat, you sound like an 80 year old cigarette smoker, who knows from his own experience that cigarettes don't give you lung cancer. Most of your experts are probably experts in radio electronics, not oncology. Because you toss them out, most TELECOM Digest readers won't have any idea of the range of research showning similar findings to the Adelaide Hospital work. I'm a great admirer, Pat, but this comment about your reluctance to give space to this problem is a direct parallel to the publishing problems that most scientists face when they work in this area. Who wants to be the editor to announce "Cell phones give you xxxx?" Some journal editors have already made up their minds that all such research is a fake and the scientists are charlatans, and others don't want to be accused of sensationalism even if it is good science. Pat in his role as moderator, has not chosen to try to distinguish between legitimate scientific research findings, and scuttlebutt from idiotic activists - because, as he says, he doesn't believe radio waves can be a problem. He doesn't have the background in such a specialised area to make such an important decision. That is precisely the problem that many of the top bioelectromagnetic scientists say they find when trying to publish in the top scientific journals. So, Pat unwittingly provided me with the perfect example as to why scientific journals are reluctant to publish these findings; their editors are human -- and this is a subject where people have strong opinions and biases. In fact, the reason why TELECOM Digest received this article direct from my keyboard is that the Chief of Staff at "The Australian" newspaper (I write the weekly telecommunications column) also applied her own form of censorship and refused to run it last week because it was 'old news' (a day old). She also doubles as the Medical Writer. It is wise to be cynical about such claims and reports -- but let's not just dismiss all of them in a knee-jerk way without a) reading the reports, and b) knowing a bit about the subject. > Scott Nelson (scott_d_nelson@rockdal.aud.alcatel.com) wrote: > As I understand it, medical > scientists and physicists both agree on how high frequency radiation > such as X- and Gamma-rays can have genetic affects, but I have seen no > hypothesis on how low-frequency RF might affect biology. I am told > that the general theoretical concensus is that low frequency RF only > serves to manipulate cells *physically*. That is to say that they can > cause physical movement or excitation of matter which -- as far as we > know -- only results in the generation of heat. The lack of a plausible mechanism has been the stumbling block in this reseach for years. Now the problem is solved -- in one way! There are about fifty, so take your pick. There are dozens dealing with DNA and the messager systems that keep cell growth in check, and others to do with the inter-cell 'gutters' which carry messages between cells and also act as electrical channels. Then there are dozens to do with free radicals (which last only nanoseconds) and such structural and functional things as stochastic resonance (eyes use this at night), layered resonance (the brain is not electrically uniform), magnetic perception (the pineal may play a role - melatonin). Most likely thre are dozens or mechanisms, some working at R/F frequencies, and some at GSM 217Hz ELF power-pulse frequency. I don't pretend to understand more than a few of these, but if you really want to know, there's a book out with a good section on the current state of thinking. One section is by Dr Ross Adey, who knows more about this than is decent. The book is 'Mobile Communications Safety" by Kuster, Balzano and Lin. Chapman & Hall 1997 ISBN 0 412 75000 7. There is also a freebie (to Australians anyway) with some excellent overview and basic mechanism (and readable) stuff. It is the 1994 Australian overview study by Dr Stan Barnett of the CSIRO, "Biological effects and safety of EMR". Fax the Spectrum Management Agency at +61 6 256 5353 and ask. They can only refuse. > If there is any sound hypothisis to the contrary regarding low-frequency > RF causing genetic mutation, I would like to hear of it. You can't prove a no-effects hypothesis. The research either finds something or it doesn't. A lot of them don't. However there are three thousand different variables, and it is almost impossible to replicate studies exactly. The most obvious study of the kind you are refering to is the Grundler series of studies done ten to twenty years ago, which showed that the certain strain of yeast he used in cell cultures, was highly sensitive to radio frequencies (way below any thermal effects level. After exposure it grew in dramatically different ways to the controls. This was an important finding at the time. However two groups have recently tried to duplicated this study, but without success. There's no question about Grundler's honesty -- he was one of the world's top scientists. But yeast strains are very different, and who can say now what strain of yeast he used -- and in those early days they didn't record temperatures, or pay as much attention as they do today to control condition matching, blind detection, etc. So these null finding throw up more questions than before. Maybe the original finding was wrong, maybe the new findings reveal evidence of some new mechanism that is worth investigating. > And, knowing how newsgroups can spawn more missinformation from rumor > rather than fact, I would like to see solid references on any sources > quoted. My electric-words.com site lists a few hundred references with some brief notes, and I'm adding some more detailed abstract information in the articles area. There are probably 10,000 relevant papers in this area, of which God-knows-how-many are good science. At least half are obviously bad science, and a lot are junk science. But you can clearly idenfity a few hundred that are very good science, and the problem is that most of these point to problems. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The sleight of hand comes while you are reading their lips! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Stewart Fist, Technical writer and journalist. Current Australian columns: Archives of my columns are available at the Australian and also at the ABC site:< http://www.abc.net.au/http/pipe.htm > Development site: Phone:+612 9416 7458 Fax: +612 9416 4582 Old Homepage:< http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/stewart_fist > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 02:20:30 -0400 From: Jack Decker Subject: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? I'm not certain of all the details, but it appears that the latest FCC regulations will cause additional residential phone lines to be charged at a higher rate than the primary phone line. I'm not sure what the rationale was behind this, but my first reaction was that this is going to cause a lot of headaches for phone companies and customers alike. Aside from the obvious question of why buying multiples of a service should cost more in the case of telephone service, when in just about any other service industry the cost would be the same or less, there is a very real problem in defining exactly what is an "additional" residential phone line. You would think that would be easy, and in some cases it might be. For example, you have one person living in a single family residence, and there are two phone lines. So, one is therefore an "additional" line, right? Perhaps, but suppose that person rents a room in his home to another, unrelated person, and that person wants their own phone line. Is that a single residence, or two? Which person gets stuck with the higher phone bill? Let's take another example. Someone owns a small apartment building, and rents out rooms. Now, when I say "apartment building", you probably think "that's not a home" - but it could be, if the home is large enough and the owner is allowed to rent out rooms. An apartment building is a residence; it just happens to be a residence where many people live. In theory, only one resident of that building would be entitled to the lowest cost phone service, and everyone else in the building would pay the higher rate. Which lucky resident gets the cheap service? Let's say it's a big old house in a college town, renting out rooms to college students, who each want their own phone line. Do the students pay the higher rate because only the owner of the home gets the discounted line? If not, then let's say that a college kid moves out and an adult relative of the homeowner moves into one of the rooms - let's say it's an adult son or daughter, or maybe a parent or grandparent. If the college kids didn't have to pay the higher rate, does the adult relative have to simply because it's a relative? I hope you see where I'm going with this. As I see it, one of two things are inevitable - in fact, both are probably inevitable. In some cases, people who have a justifiable reason for wanting their own phone service will get stuck with paying a higher rate simply because they're in some sort of multiple-occupant building. OR, people will avoid the extra charge by putting the additional line(s) in the name of someone else ... perhaps another adult living in the home (even if only part time). Here's another one for you: What happens if there is a single phone line in the home of a married couple, and it happens to be in the husband's name only. Now the wife has a need for her own phone line, so she applies for one in her name, and is told she will have to pay the higher charge. She might justifiably wonder why she has to pay more for her line than her husband does. Now you may say, well, they're married, they will just have to figure that one out for themselves. Okay, then what if it's an unmarried couple living together? I wonder if NOW and the other feminist organizations are going to realize that in many cases it will be the woman who gets stuck with the higher bill, and whether that will cause them any concern? My point is this: Whatever you may think of the rest of the FCC's actions, the idea of mandating different rates for exactly the same service, simply because someone has more than one line coming into the home, seems like an idea that would make sense only to a government bureaucrat. If "representative government" still has any real meaning, every person who has a second phone line in their home, or who thinks they might someday need a second phone line, ought to take the time to write a note to their federal legislators, expressing the view that equivalent service should be charged at equivalent rates. And I would hope that some of the "social action" organizations would take a moment to stop and consider how this might adversely affect their constituents, and consider whether they want to weigh in on this. This is, after all, a form of discrimination... you get service at one price if it's the only line into a building, but you may pay a higher price just because you choose to, or are forced to by economic considerations, live in the same building as someone else who already has phone service. My final thought is that I don't even think this will have the desired effect of recovering revenue lost from the lowering of "access charges" on toll calls. The reason is that as the cost of additional lines increases, many people may disconnect existing second lines, or put off ordering additional lines, or figure out ways to make exiting lines do double-duty (for example, making one line serve both a computer and FAX machine). I have a gut feeling that the number of disconnections, and the lost business from additional lines that would otherwise have been ordered, will more than offset any gains made by increased access charges on additional residential phone lines. Jack ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Utah Delays 801 Relief Three Months Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 00:13:50 -0700 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , jcropper@NOSPAM.lincs.net wrote: > Another state has put NPA relief on hold, this time over concerns by > the NANC with regards to inequities in relief duration as a direct > result of the 801/435 split. > As originally proposed, the split would separate the Wasatch front (801) > from the rest of the state (435). 801 would last until 2004, while 435 > would last until 2024. NANC guidelines set forth in February 1997 state > that a difference of no greater than fifteen years exist in a > split-relief situation. > In a filing April 16th, Utah regulators decided to DELAY relief of 801 > for three months, while they sought a variance from the NANC, > permitting the split to proceed as originally approved. > This would push permissive dialing back to September 22nd, 1997. No > reference was made to changing mandatory dialing, originally scheduled > as January 18th, 1998, and it is not known at this time whether this > will also change. > Refer to http://web.state.ut.us/bbs/PSC/DL05/11146P.WPD on the Utah web > server for full details. Please note that you will need WP 5.1 to read > it (or a compatible converter). Well, I'm duly astounded. The Utah PSC actually makes a cogent and reasonable case for this highly lopsided split. The essence of their case is that if you move part of the Wasatch front (i.e., the population center of the state, the SLC/Provo corridor) into 435, all you do is advance the need for 435 to split by several years, while only providing an extra 2 years or so for 801, since that's where all the numbering growth is taking place. Further, they quite clearly lay the groundwork for a future *overlay* of 801 in five or six years. If you carry out the current split proposal, you can leave the rural areas of the state with a single area code that won't change for quite some time, while the metropolitan area gets sensible overlays. In particular, that way the rural areas can keep seven-digit local dialing until 10D becomes mandatory nationwide. On the other hand, if you force Provo and/or Ogden into 435, you are left with a situation where 435 will have to split again before the rural areas can be left alone and the cities can be left to overlay. It actually makes sense in this case to carve off 20% of the population (occupying over 90% of the land area) to provide just enough relief to tide the cities over until number portability makes overlays more widely acceptable. ** Do not spam e-mail me! ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best-com >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << ------------------------------ From: dobson@haas.berkeley.edu Subject: Digital Telecommunications Conference at UC Berkeley Date: 7 May 1997 21:27:00 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley BRIDGING DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES AND REGULATORY PARADIGMS The Berkeley Symposium On Policy and Strategy for Converging Information Industries June 27-28, 1997 The Consortium for Research on Telecommunications Policy is pleased to sponsor a conference on the economics of converging information industries. The third in a series, this year's conference will inaugurate Berkeley's new Center for Telecommunications & Digital Convergence, and will be held at the architecturally acclaimed Haas School of Business on the University of California, Berkeley campus. THEME Digital convergence presents new challenges for business strategy and public policy. As legal and regulatory barriers standing between information industries fall, incumbent firms and startups alike adopt a wide array of strategies to capitalize on integrated digital services. These strategies need to be evaluated from perspectives of profitability as well as their competitive and efficiency effects. The conference will bring together academics conducting research in telecommunications policy and corporate strategy with business leaders and government policy makers who are managing the transition to digital technologies. PLENARY SESSIONS The first day of the conference will be devoted to plenary sessions of general interest: Integrated Networks: Is the Dream Still Alive? New integrated technologies; successes and failures of integrating voice, video and data; recent regulatory developments; overall assessment of the business case for integrated networks. Networks and Bottlenecks Essential facilities in phone networks and computer hardware and software; use and abuse of IP protection; monopoly bottleneck or first-mover rewards; recent court rulings on open access to networks. What Urgent Issues Does Digital Convergence Raise for the Telecommunications Industry? Threats from bypass technologies; importance of first mover advantages; legal barriers to convergence; implications of integrated technologies for Telecom business strategy. What Can the Computer and Telecommunications Industries Learn from Each Other? Coping with government regulation; alternative approaches to forming industry technical standards; organizational and competitive implications of radical technological change. INVITED SPEAKERS Business and government leaders and distinguished academic researchers have be invited to serve as panelists and keynote speakers, including: Hans-Werner Braun, Chief Technology Officer, Teledesic * James Canizales, Corporate Strategy, AirTouch * Rachelle Chong, Commissioner, FCC Dave Dorman, President & CEO, Pacific Bell Joseph Farrell, Chief Economist, FCC * Richard Gilbert, University of California * Andrew Grove, CEO, Intel Peter Huber, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute * Richard Notebaert, CEO, Ameritech Gary Reback, Senior Partner, Wilson, Sonsini * Michael Riordan, Professor, Boston University * Tony Rutkowski, VP, General Magic * Eric Schmidt, CEO, Novell * Carl Shapiro, University of California * Les Vadasz, Senior VP, Intel * - confirmed CONTRIBUTED PAPERS The second day of the conference will consist of parallel sessions with presentations aimed at the research community. At this time several papers are confirmed including those by the following authors: Nicholas Economides Mark Schankerman Gerry Faulhaber Oz Shy Shane Greenstein J. Greg Sidak Sandy Levin Pablo Spiller Paul MacAvoy Daniel Spulber Michael Salinger Len Waverman Larry White Additional papers are solicited on the following topics: - whither cable-telco switched broadband competition? - alternative paths to entering digital industries - business strategy and public policy toward merger and divestiture of domestic and international telecommunications firms - impact of cable telephony and internet services on traditional telephone markets - coordination of state and federal policies toward converging information industries - conflict and coordination of legal doctrine and technological convergence - bundling and tying of voice, video and data services and consumer response - nature of essential facilities in communications networks and computer systems - intellectual property protection as a means to assist or block technology convergence - role of broadcast television in the age of digital video - the PC vs. TV standards battle SUBMISSIONS To have a paper considered for presentation, submit an abstract of approximately 300 words, including title, author(s) and affiliations along with mailing and emailing addresses of the primary presenter. Completed papers will be given preference. For full consideration, abstracts or papers must arrive by May 16, 1997 by mail, email, facsimile or through the website: CRTP-CTDC Conference F402 Haas School of Business #1930 University of California at Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-1930 Email: dobson@haas.berkeley.edu Fax: 510-642-2826 Papers will be selected for presentation by the conference's two faculty organizers: Prof. Glenn A. Woroch, Director, Consortium for Research on Telecommunications Policy Prof. Michael Katz, Director, Center for Telecommunications & Digital Convergence Preference will be given to papers that focus on some economic aspect of digital convergence. Accepted presentations will be considered for publication in the 1997 special telecommunications issue of Industrial and Corporate Change, a journal published quarterly by Oxford University Press. This will be the third annual issue to publish selected papers of the CRTP annual conference. CONFERENCE WEB PAGE The conference will maintain a web page at: haas.berkeley.edu/~imio/crtp3.html Attendees may register for the conference and presenters may submit paper abstracts electronically. The site will also provide information regarding local travel and accommodations as well as the conference program as it becomes available. REGISTRATION INFORMATION Registration Fees: $300 corporate (by June 26) $200 government $100 academic/nonprofit Late Registration: $50 additional (after June 25) Refunds: Before June 23: full refund less $50 processing fee After June 22: no refund Registration includes: Lunch and dinner at the University Art Museum on Friday Continental breakfast on Friday and Saturday Breakout refreshments Internet access sites on location Registration fees are waived for speakers, who will also be reimbursed for travel expenses up to $600. Exceptions may be made for speakers traveling from outside of North America. ACCOMMODATIONS Rooms has been reserved at the following local hotels: Claremont Hotel & Resort (510-843-3000) Durant Hotel (510-845-8981) Bancroft Hotel (800-549-1002, 510-549-1000) Berkeley Marriott Hotel (510-548-7929) You may also want to consider these nearby hotels: Gramma's Rose Garden Inn (510-549-2145) The French Hotel (510-548-9330) The conference website has many more options including San Francisco accommodations. REGISTRATION FORM To register, please the complete this form and mail, e-mail or fax to the address under paper submissions and mark it to the attention of: "Ms. Pat Murphy." Name: _____________________________________________ Title:_______________________________________________ Organization:________________________________________ Address:____________________________________________ City:____________________________ State___Zip:_______ Country:____________________________________________ Business Phone: ______________________________________ Fax: _______________________________________________ Email: _____________________________________________ Please Check the Following: |_| I plan to attend and have enclosed the advanced registration fee: Please bill my: |_| VISA |_| Mastercard |_| Discover # __________________________________________________________________ Signed: _____________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ From: wrfuse@mab.ecse.rpi.NOSPAM.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) Subject: Telephone Testimony in the McVeigh Okla Bombing Case Date: 7 May 1997 22:45:15 GMT Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY, USA Reply-To: wrfuse@mab.ecse.rpi.NOSPAM.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) For a detailed description of the prepaid calling card business, of how calls are processed, and of how records are maintained, see the trial transcripts for the Timothy McVeigh Oklahoma City bombing trial, at, i.a., http://www.cnn.com/US/9703/okc.trial/transcripts/may/050697.eve.html It's quite interesting. ---- Send email about this posting to me, Wm. Randolph U Franklin, here: ---- WRFUSE at MAB.ECSE.RPI.EDU, optionally in PGP. Do not send ---- unsolicited commercial announcements. Spam the following fine ---- businesses instead. postmaster@mail-response.com ventures@mail-response.com vip@allvip.com postmaster@allvip.com info@opmcybershop.com null@quantcom.com postmaster@quantcom.com test@quantcom.com newsletter@shoppingplanet.com postmaster@shoppingplanet.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #114 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 10 00:41:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA03442; Sat, 10 May 1997 00:41:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 00:41:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705100441.AAA03442@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #115 TELECOM Digest Sat, 10 May 97 00:41:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 115 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled Publicly For First Time (Mike King) Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Information Superhighway (P Robinson) False 911 Calls, Payphones, etc. (Tad Cook) City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (Lee Winson) The "Call Director" Telephone Set? (Lee Winson) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (George Gilder) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Robert Weller) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (pastark@cloud9.net) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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 King Subject: 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled Publicly For First Time Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 21:09:47 PDT ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 08:56:30 -0700 From: sqlgate@sf-ptg-fw.pactel.com Subject: NEWS: 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 6, 1997 FOR MORE INFORMATION: Bonnie Ward (916) 972-3019 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled Publicly For The First Time Customers Will Get A Chance To Comment On Plans at Public Meetings in May and June [Editor's Note: This news release describing area code splits was issued by the California-Nevada Code Administrator, who represents the telecommunications industry as a whole. Final decisions on code issues are made by the California Public Utilities Commission. Pacific Bell includes such news releases as a service to our customers.] SAN RAMON, Calif. -- Residents of the 805 area code will have an opportunity to comment on two plans for adding a new area code to their region at a series of six public meetings in late May and early June. Doug Hescox, California Code Administrator, said a new area code is needed by early 1999 to keep up with the increasing demand for new telephone numbers in the region. That demand -- which is being seen across the state -- is being driven by several factors. The two primary are the onset of competition in the state's local telephone service market, with each new provider requiring its own supply of phone numbers, as well as the high-technology explosion of fax machines, pagers, cellular phones, modems for Internet access and other telecommunications equipment requiring phone numbers. The 805 area code currently serves all of Santa Barbara County, the majority of Kern, Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties, the north portion of Los Angeles County, and very small portions of Monterey, Fresno, Kings and Tulare counties. Dates and locations of the six meetings are: Wednesday, May 28 San Luis Obispo City/County Library 995 Palm St. Community Room 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Thursday, May 29 Santa Barbara City Hall 735 Anacapa St. Council Chambers * Use Parking Lot #10 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Thursday, May 29 Camarillo City Hall 601 Carmen Drive Council Chambers 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Tuesday, June 3 Lancaster City Hall 44933 N. Fern Ave. Council Chambers 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Wednesday, June 4 Valencia (Santa Clarita) Valencia Town Center 24201 West Valencia Blvd. Community Room 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Thursday, June 5 Bakersfield Beale Library 701 Truxtun Ave. Auditorium 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Customers unable to attend one of the meetings can send written comments by Thursday, June 5 to: California Code Administration 2600 Camino Ramon Room 1S900U San Ramon, CA 94583 Two plans proposed by the telecommunications industry for geographically splitting the 805 area code into two portions will be presented at the meetings. In a geographic split, the area code is divided, with part of the region keeping the existing area code and part receiving a new one. This means people who live or work in the area receiving the new code will need to change the area code portion of their phone numbers. The proposed split plans do not indicate which area will receive the new area code and which will keep 805. The public will have an opportunity to comment on which area should keep the 805 area code, as well as on the proposed split boundaries, at the meetings. Neither split plan would impact the price of calls. The price of a call is determined by distance and is not affected by the creation of a new area code. The details of the two plans are: * Divide the existing 805 area code on a north-south basis. Under this plan, the split line would run through the southeastern portion of the existing 805 area code. The area south and east of the split line would cover the vast majority of Ventura County, the southeastern portion of Kern County (including Edwards, Mojave and Rosamond) and most of the northern portion of Los Angeles County (including the Santa Clarita Valley, Newhall, Palmdale and Lancaster). The area north and west of the split line would serve all of Santa Barbara County, the vast majority of San Luis Obispo County and most of Kern County. The north area would also serve existing 805 customers in small portions of Monterey County (including Bradley and Parkfield), Tulare County (including Earlimart and California Hot Springs), the northwestern tip of Los Angeles County (Gorman area) and very small portions of Fresno, Kings and Ventura counties. * Under this plan, if 805 were assigned to the north, it would have a projected life of 10 to 11 years, and the new area code in the south would have a projected life of 12 to 14 years. If 805 were assigned to the south, it would have a projected life of 12 to 14 years, and the new area code in the north would have a projected life of 10 to 11 years. * Divide the existing 805 area code on an east-west basis. Under this plan, the area west of the split line would include the vast majority of San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties along with very small portions of Monterey, Fresno and Kings counties. The area east of the split line would include the majority of Kern County, the northern portion of Los Angeles County and very small portions of Tulare, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. * Under this plan, if 805 were assigned to the east, it would have a projected life of 14 to 16 years, and the new area code in the west would have a projected life of 8 to 10 years. If 805 were assigned to the west, it would have a projected life of 8 to 10 years, and the new area code in the east would have a projected life of 14 to 16 years. * At the meetings, details of the plans will be outlined and a public comment period will follow. Under state law, the telecommunications industry is required to hold public meetings and consider customer input before a final area code relief plan is filed with the California Public Utilities Commission. The Commission makes the final decision on the area code relief plan. A decision is expected later this year. ----------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 00:05:50 -0400 From: Paul Robinson Organization: Evergreen Software Subject: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Information Superhighway At another place, I work for another company answering Technical Support telephone calls for an Internet Service Provider. We allow people to register for the service by loading an automated installer program, which then, when finished installing the software, allows them to dial into the registration server to choose their username and password. I got a call from a woman who is not a user of the service, but a victim. In order to explain the entire situation I have to give almost the full number, however I have changed the number here - and not giving out her area code - in order to protect her privacy. The woman called, not because she is trying to use the service, but because people trying to use the service are calling her! Or rather, their computers are calling her, virtually any hour of the day or night. The woman's number would be something like 701-8001 in this example. Apparently, people's computers are calling this woman's number instead of our registration server. This doesn't make any sense, because in order to register for the service, a user's computer will connect to the registration server by dialing a toll-free number. For the purposes of this demonstration, I'll pretend the registration server's number is 800-123-4567. Had her number been the same as the last 7 digits of the number I could understand that it's somehow missing the 1-800, but her number is completely different from the number of the registration server even without the area code. The software to set up registration is fairly telephone savvy, allowing people to pick things like whether they have tone or pulse, if they dial a number such as "9" to get an outside line, or if they have to disable call waiting. If they select "disable call waiting", it is smart enough to give them the *70 code and even allowing them to change it if, for example, they have pulse dial. That's when it hit me. Consider the registration server's number with a cancel call waiting code, only don't put in the star, and you get 70-1-800-1 which is the woman's number. (The rest of the 800 number, which in this ficticious example is 234-567, would be ignored by the dial switch.) The *70 code for cancel call waiting, followed by the 1-800 number being dialed, only the star key got lost! As a result, some people are using the cancel call waiting code but somehow the star is not included. The woman felt a little better when I explained to her why she was getting these calls, and I said we would look into the problem and try to fix it. But it's interesting how a small and tiny error can cause someone major headaches. Or in this case, some poor woman whose number matches a misdialled call waiting code and a computer 1-800 number becomes, in effect, 'road kill' on the 'information superhighway'. Paul Robinson (formerly PAUL@TDR.COM) ------------------------------ Subject: False 911 Calls, Payphones, etc. Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 18:04:16 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > Pat, most (if not all) 911 systems out there today *CAN* hold the line > and trunk, just as most *real telco* operators can (i.e. TSPS/TOPS/OSPS, > and also the old cordboards as well). Unfortunately this *used* to be true with B911 and earlier E911, but with selective routing through tandems, the Called Party Control feature no longer works on 911 in many areas. Before selective routing, the trunks, which were configured like the TSPS/CAMA trunks mentioned above, went directly from the originating CO to the PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point). Just like a telco operator, the PSAP operator could hold up the trunk. But when selective routing started, all of the 911 trunks in an area would go via a tandem switch, where the ANI would be grabbed and they could be looked up in the database and routed to the correct PSAP. When they were rerouted, the PSAP operators lost this control. The old style ringback on these trunks was great, because the operator could hit a key which would cause the PSAP interface to send back TSPS ringback signalling, and ringing was sent back to the calling party directly on the metallic pair in the originating CO. Now with tandems in the way, the method used with redial is to grab the ANI and then put it into a dialer on a standard phone line, and the operator dials back. The old scenario that was great for the operator control of the trunk was that someone in a panic calls in a fire, and before the operator can ask "how big is the fire?" or any basic questions, the caller hangs up to phone their neighbors to ask them to bring their hoses. With the old method, when they picked up, the operator was still there. With the newer system, they dial back like anyone else, and get a busy. > This is similar to many PBX systems and cellular systems. The trunk > (loop) that the PBX uses to place outgoing calls is the number that the > 911 center would have show up on their computer, *NOT* the actual > incoming number of the telephone on an employee's desk or in the hotel > room. The 911 center could hold the outgoing loop, but the PBX had > already disconnected the extension from that loop if they had hung-up. Proctor & Associates of Redmond, WA has the PBX-ANI system to solve this problem, and I think PBX manufacturers will be making this an optional feature on their systems in the future. This involves a PBX having its own 911 trunks that go to the tandem, and they can send whatever 7 or 10 digit ANI that they want, which will be cross-referenced in the database at the other end to see exactly where the PBX extension is. > Of course, many PBX systems today are enhanced enough to be more > compatible with 911 systems, or at least send out the actual > extension's incoming 7/10 digit number on calls to 911. Some cellular > systems might send the actual cellular phone number to the 911 center > on such calls, Coincidentally, the firm mentioned above also makes a similar system for cellsites which delivers the calling number and the cellsite facing. More expensive systems will also give an approximate lat/long coordinate for the caller. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification. I know that in Skokie for example, the 911 dispatcher frequently calls to the agent at the train station asking that person to look around at the various payphones and see if it appears someone is attempting to get assistance. The reason is the payphones themselves are all one-way outgoing only lines. After the agent is gone at night, the only option the police dispatcher has is to send a car out there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Date: 8 May 1997 22:22:16 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS Per the talk about 911 ... I was in Philadelphia and noticed the fire alarm pull boxes were gone. They used to be mounted on utility poles at corners. As a child, we were trained to know where the nearest pull box was to our home. If we used it, we were to wait there for the fire truck so they'd know where to go. Fire drill posters in buildings included the nearest street pull box. I was wondering if other cities have removed their boxes. They've been gone in Trenton NJ for years. Actually, when I was a child, I was confused by emergency training. I thought you would use the telephone to call police (dial Operator), but would have to run to the nearest pull box to call the fire department. In the early 1970s I had a tour of the Philadelphia fire dispatching center (this was pre-911 days.) At that time, it seemed most calls came via boxes, not the telephone. A pullbox caused a loud oscillator to beep the four digit code of the box. (I think the beep was duplicated in the fire house that served the location, but I'm not sure). The dispatcher identified the location, and telephoned (through a private direct line PBX) the fire house to provide details. Calls could also come in via a telephone, either the fire emergency number or from the Bell Operator, it was answered on a small Call Director phone. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The boxes have been gone in Chicago for years with the exception of schools, hospitals and residences for geriatric patients (old people's homes) where they are required by law. The reason is they were subject to too much abuse. People who like to play games would pull the alarm on a street corner box then run off before the firemen arrived to find nothing going on. With 911 working as effeciently as it does, and the prevalence of telephones, there is no longer any real need for the boxes anyway. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: The "Call Director" Telephone Set? Date: 8 May 1997 22:29:17 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS In the 1960s, the Bell System introduced a "Call Director" telephone set, which was a key telephone set, but with many buttons. The handset was on the side, there was a dial (or keypad), then vertical rows of buttons. I was wondering: Were there any special features in a Call Director system that were not available in the six-button key sets? If so, could someone describe some of the features? Or, was a Call Director merely a keyset with more buttons to handle more lines? I know as the Bell System got more into cordless PBX systems, the operator's console looked like a Call Director, except there was an additional lamp next to each button to indicate supervisory status. I've seen such sets used on tiny PBXs as well as massive Centrexes. My question deals with Call Directors used as direct phones, not consoles. [As an aside, I've also seen Centrex operator switchboards using old fashioned 551/552 cord switchboards as well as the newer 608 cord boards. I now remember in the old days on Centrex, when you wished to transfer a call and flashed the hookswitch, you had to wait for your operator to do it. The newer ones gave you a dial tone.] Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'call director' phone sets could be used in various ways. The buttons could simply be incoming lines or they could perform other functions. It all depended on how the call director was wired. I saw a few of them wired to serve as monitoring units by supervisors in large customer service settings. Each customer service person had a phone (with calls tossed to them by an automatic call distributor) and each 'section leader' or supervisor had a call director with many buttons which enabled them to (a) pick up a call from any of the representatives and speak with the customer or (b) to monitor a call silently at any position. If they were requested to take a call from a customer, they simply pressed the associated button for the line. They had their own private line from the centrex making an appearance on one button, and the inter- esting part was how they monitored the workers: one button on the call director was for that purpose. They would depress that button then use the touch tone pad to enter the four digit extension number in their group they wished to monitor. It would just click right in silently so the supervisor could pretend to be making a phone call while actually listening to someone else's call instead. I've seen call directors at one company where the several buttons terminated 'tie lines' to different places. The unit I saw had (I think) 15 buttons; two were for extensions on the local PBX, one was a direct outside line bypassing the PBX, one was a manual, common-battery intercom; two or three others were used to activate buzzer signals at other 'intercom' stations and the other seven or eight had such esoteric labels on them as 'New York', 'Los Angeles' and 'Dallas'. If you went in on one of those it was a ring-down circuit apparently to the office of the company in the cities named on each button. And of course there was a hold key. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 10:17:05 EDT From: gg@gilder.com (George Gilder) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Since cell phones are not exactly a rare technology, why on earth should we pay any attention to the claims of carcinogenic effects until the incidence of relevant cancers rises in the population using the devices? For all the mumbo jumbo from the radiophobes with their tortured rodents in tow, the fact is that there are fewer, not more, brain tumors and other cancers among users of cellular phones, computers, and other radiators, than among non users. Thus there is no problem whatsoever to explain. Period. On the contrary, voluminous recent evidence supports the proposition of hormesis -- that radiation below a threshold not approached by cellphones imparts a statistically significant increase in resistance to cancers among humans. Perhaps that is why cellphone rich regions such as Scandinavia and Japan lead the world in longevity and US users of PCs and cellphones live longer than non users. In general, all around the globe the use of electricity and other electromagnetic oscillations correlates almost perfectly with greater longevity. Unfortunately among the beneficiaries of this public health boon are product liability lawyers and their junk science accomplices causing lucrative plagues of hypochondria and litigation. George Gilder ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: Fri, 9 May 97 09:20:24 PDT From: rweller@h-e.com (Robert Weller) Organization: Hammett & Edison, Inc.-Serving the broadcast industry since 1952 The Royal Adelaide Hospital study is an "outlier," inasmuch as most other studies failed to detect any increase in the cancer risk ratio, and so duplication of its results is critical before any conclusions can be made. In my opinion, there are some serious flaws in this research. Dosimetry. Normally, this type of animal exposure is conducted in a constant field, anechoic environment, so that exposures are uniform and well-characterized. In this study, the exposure chamber was lined with aluminum. This lining, like a microwave oven, would be expected to cause "hot spots" in the fields, and the actual exposure levels may therefore be higher than indicated. Also, the energy absorbed is normally calculated by measuring remotely the forward and reflected power (the difference is the amount absorbed). In this study, power density measurements were conducted by a person in the chamber. The presence of someone other than the subject animal would perturb the fields and absorb energy, again causing the apparent exposure level to be lower than the actual level. Subjects. While I am less familiar with this area, the transgenic mice used in the research had genetic alterations in areas that are not contained in the human genome. Research using this type of subject is apparently somewhat controversial in most circles. Better subject choices might have been "P53" transgenic mice or unaltered rats. The "PIM1" transgenic mice are not at all like kitchen mice; they are more like sloths, and are about 15 times more likely to get certain types of cancer than "normal mice. The FDA has been pushing the Wireless Technology Research (WTR) organization, funded in the US by an industry blind trust, to use rats rather than transgenic mice. The future. Duplication of this research will require two to four years, but there have been other studies that failed to detect an RF-cancer link, so this study is just one data point. The standards-setting organizations in the US (ANSI/IEEE, NCRP) are designed to look at the "big picture," being uninfluenced by the results of any single study. Robert Weller, PE Hammett & Edison, Inc. Consulting Engineers San Francisco ------------------------------ From: pastark@cloud9.net Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: 8 May 1997 20:17:31 -0400 Organization: Cloud 9 Internet, White Plains, NY, USA Stewart Fist (fist@ozemail.com.au) wrote: > A doubling of tumours in 100 exposed mice, is not an insignificant finding. > In fact, statistically, it is above the 1% level of confidence, and is > therefore highly significant. It is easy to make instant judgments on statements like this, but I would like to see some specific data. For instance -- how many of those 100 "exposed mice" actually had tumors? Suppose in a group of 100 "unexposed" mice, one develops a tumor, whereas in a group of 100 "exposed" mice two mice develop tumors. Is this significant? Look at it another way: In one group of 100 male casino customers, one person won money, whereas in a group of 100 female customers, two people won money. Is this doubling of winning customers statistically significant? Does it mean that women are inherently better gamblers? Does it mean that the casino's machines are prejudiced against men? One could put all sorts of spins on this ... Pete ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #115 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 10 01:04:14 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA05188; Sat, 10 May 1997 01:04:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 01:04:14 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705100504.BAA05188@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #116 TELECOM Digest Sat, 10 May 97 01:04:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 116 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC (Bradley Allen) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (oldbear@arctos.com) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Jeffrey Rhodes) Token Ring Switch Designer Needed (Tony Brown) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (John R. Covert) TV Interview With Two Hackers Banned From Computers (Minor Threat) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Bradley Ward Allen Subject: Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users Date: 08 May 1997 09:14:36 -0400 Reply-To: ulmo@armory.com > (including rural areas -- radios can go a long way today (and could > for a while)), This writer piqued my interest. What is the cost to provide service to the "rural" contingent of the USA, including Internet TCP/IP data services, using radio? Or using any techniques? Consider these methods: * Radio transceivers in homes * Radio towers * Radio dishes (microwave) * Satellite - low orbit * Satellite - high orbit * Cable With licensing, equipment, and maintenance, how much would each cost? For instance, how much does it cost to stick a specially prepared dead straight tree trunk in the ground, attach a unit with a metal pole, solar cells, batteries, and a couple of transceivers in it that would relay radio signals as far as 50 miles in each direction? Now there's a question: how much energy can solar cells store up? Is there anyplace in the USA where power utilities are unavailable every 50 miles from that place to anyplace with higher population? If not, then the solar panels could be reduced or omitted. What is the highest cost population density distribution and locality to service? What I'm thinking of here is that radio is cheaper than cable in long distance, and can higher bandwidth in lower population than it can in higher population, and cable is less expensive in higher density and can have higher bandwidth than radio, so the two are basically complimentary and help each other out in various situations. Radio has the biggest physical limitation of airwave congestion, and cost can be minimized around that one variable. What is the highest cost density and distance within the United States? Or even within the Bell Atlantic (new merged company) calling area? I don't know but it seems to me that providing telephone service to everybody is just an exercise in careful airwave use engineering, and the actual equipment costs are rather low. With the necessary technology to use in any particular density/terrain requirements, I can hardly see the equipment necessary to service any one particular normal end-user (2 way voice + interactive real time data) costing more than $2,000. Even a end-user with one relay station dedicated to him would only pay $6,000 for that. Break $6,000 into the life of the equipment, say three years, and suddenly you have $166.00 per month. That's less than I pay for my local phone service, and well worth the cost. If the person doesn't need to surf the web and yack on the phone simultaneously, they can use half the bandwidth for a lower cost -- what is that half the cost? -- and pay much less. One way to deal with the issue of high monthly costs is to have the remote user purchase and own the equipment used (and make maintenance arrangements of their own -- say, subscribing to a service company, or paying a service technician every time something goes wrong with some cheap insurance policy with a three-year deductible which equals the usual wear-and-tear costs, just in case a tree does smash the boxes to smitherines six times in three months). This way, if they are afraid they cannot afford $166.00 per month, they can make an investment that will last them for as long as the equipment is good, usually far longer than three years. Solid state equipment in rough terrain can last about a decade, right? Or am I way off in this estimate? That would make the cost about $50/month, right out of a modern day urban persons' phone bill. If they cannot pay up front for the investment, which is usually the case since new service is usually requested by people who are new in the world (i.e., young), then loans can be taken out to purchase the equipment. (There are all sorts of ways you can word that: "lease to buy", etc.) This seems like the best method: if the person finds themselves in a financial bout of trouble, then the creditor simply asks the debtor to return the unpaid-for portion of the equipment and pay a low time-based storage fee until they regain their ability to make timely payments. If the debtor doesn't bring the equipment into the collateral location, then the creditor charges a reasonable collection fee (not gouging or anything, just the cost to do the work) to do the collection of the unpaid-for equipment themselves (because of this it may be of benefit to have the user pay for his home equipment first), and lacking the ability to do that, proceed with normal lawsuits, etc. The cost for such a loaning institution would be higher than straight-out buying something, because of interest rates and guarding against uncollectible defaults, but then it allows the user to elect to live in the remote area with less start up costs. However, if the remote user still cannot afford the communications services that they require, then they can take that into consideration while they're trying to figure out where they are going to live. If this causes 90% of rural folk to move to the city or suburb, then I think that is an appropriate thing. However, I *really* want to know the actual costs of the equipment: is it really so high that the cost must go up significantly? Remember, I'm not saying these people have to be served with AT&T 5ESS switches sitting in their garage with 5ms ping times via redundant links to local metropolises. I'm saying they can be served with ~8kHz bandwidth full-duplex radio technology, and something that can do data at around the same bandwidth requirements. That's, what, 40kHz of bandwidth to use? How directional can non-line-of-site antennas be? Also, what would be the cost of making short-wave cell sites? Those .5 watts can go a lot further down there, right? The home unit can be stationary, and be of higher wattage. I think 50 watts can go around 30 miles at 600khz, right? Equipment for that isn't that costly. If the user wants a remote unit near his home, he can make a little cell site. A good design would make a cell site usable by passers-by out of every station, even if the station was in someone's home. The home user would decide to set the rates somehow. The passer-by would set up the rate parameters they would accept. Frequently, the passer-bys will be able to use the system at a cost they desire. This would make a sort of wide-area wide-range low-capacity cellular system. Encryption would be only if the passing user was willing to pay for it in equipment and possible bandwidth costs (it could use cryptography then use a modem to use the analog signals to connect to some remote modem that also uses the same cryptography; even the remote stations don't have to be all that sophisticated). Availability is similar: pay more for more frequencies the equipment can handle, and thus a greater range of distance and capacity. Sellers of time would typically consider their liscencing costs for the airwaves, so even some rich people with an extra super-long-range airwave slice could sell this at a premium rate to that person so desiring such connectivity. If the person desires cellular connectivity at lower cost in strange areas, that person can go ahead and arrange for a cell site themselves to be put whereever they need it -- at the cost of about $10,000, it would sure beat what I've paid to McCaw cellular already, and they would be able to yack for far longer than I did! If the costs are less, then that's even better. Consider equipment that is designed to handle transceiving a broader range of frequencies, more than just one persons' voice: at a slightly higher equipment cost, the possibility of another neighbor sharing resources with you makes the costs for both you and them lower, perhaps cutting it by as much as 40% or more (when the squirrel changes the antenna direction this full moon and you're sick in bed this time around, you don't have to pay $100 for your cousin to come fix it; you just have your neighbor do it -- I'm sure a cheapie Morse code radio can go a long ways for reporting such troubles via a low-cost relay service in the area -- when the neighbor also fires up their Morse code later that day trying to figure out what the heck is going on with their connection, the Morse code relay service just repeats the message from the first sick neighbor asking them to take care of the problem; store and forward; works great; if the rural users are so busy they don't have time to learn Morse code and still don't have enough money for redundant radios and healthy drivers to drive around to fix things, then really they are no different from a heroin addicts in my opinion, and if I'm to subsidize their heroin problems, my attitude is let them die). Wait just a fricking second here. What's wrong with a satellite connection? How much would *that* cost? If the user desires less delay, they can pay for the higher cost of non-space based communications. I can think of endless problems and endless solutions, why can't the local phone companies? My knowledge is very low, however even I can see that it is cost effective to let rural users pay for themselves. Finally, let's get real here: even I can see that the decision to subsidize rural users for a particular type and level of phone service that I have in my urban area is a totally essoteric decision with no basis in actual need. Those hick towns with 500 people and their own mom-and-pop telephone company: how much would it cost for their telephone service if it wasn't subsidized at all? (Even if the local big company wanted to charge really high rates for interconnection, it could be beat by a consortium of local mom-and-pops connecting via microwave directly and relaying to a final larger company with a better interconnection cost agreement. Redundancy and capacity would be increased, costs kept reasonable via both companies.) Is the rural costing argument mostly a big lie in order to use it as any good ol' excuse to keep rates higher? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 12:05:15 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? In TELECOM Digest (Vol 17, Issue 114), Jack Decker wrote: > I'm not certain of all the details, but it appears that the latest FCC > regulations will cause additional residential phone lines to be > charged at a higher rate than the primary phone line. > I'm not sure what the rationale was behind this, but my first reaction > was that this is going to cause a lot of headaches for phone companies > and customers alike ... Jack makes a number of good points. However, the reality is that this policy is a workable compromise and clearly was designed to minimize the effect on the single-line POTS customer so that the surcharge will not run contrary to well-established regulatory mission of supporting "universal service." One should not think of this as a surcharge on multiple lines, but instead as a surcharge on *ALL* lines with each "household" getting a single exemption. Under that perspective, it begins to make a little more administrative sense. There are a lot of analogies, ranging from the "one-time capital gains exclusion on the sale of a primary residence" -- for which you will be ineligible if you marry the the widow or ex-spouse of someone who already claimed this while married -- to the fine print on the "free offer" on the cornflakes box that says "one per name, household or address." Sure there are ways of getting around this, and I am sure that some people will tell the business office to list second and third lines in the names of 'ficticious boarders' -- just like some people with home offices current use residential tariffed second lines purely for business purposes. Even so, this compromise has a virtue unusual in regulatory affairs: it is likely that the errors which occur in this system will be in favor of inappropriate exemptions rather than the application of this surcharge to those who reasonably argue that they should be exempt. Cheers, The Old Bear ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 14:31:46 -0700 From: Jeffrey Rhodes Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Jack Decker (jack@novagate.com) wrote: > I'm not certain of all the details, but it appears that the latest FCC > regulations will cause additional residential phone lines to be > charged at a higher rate than the primary phone line. > I'm not sure what the rationale was behind this, ... I thought the FCC's rationale was clear. Access charges for long distance calls are a means by which these carriers can contribute to the cost of providing "Universal Service". This subsidy means that the cost of a residential line does not reflect the real cost of installing any line. (Even though the ISP community likes to use the argument that the "profit" of installing a second line to access the Internet, never mind that these lines will in effect not increase long distance usage, should provide the telcos with the additional income to buildout interoffice facilities to the ISPs). So the FCC has lowered long distance access charges but wants to keep the monthly line cost low, so that everyone can continue to afford Universal Service. Additional residential lines are not providing Universal Service, so the new line charge is to better reflect the cost of these additional lines and to offset the decrease in long distance access revenue to subsidize primary lines. It's not easy to be the FCC. Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com ------------------------------ From: Tony Brown Subject: Token Ring Switch Designer Needed Date: 8 May 1997 14:19:18 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company, Inc. Frame-Relay, or Token Ring, or ATM - SW Engineer-Network Product Development I have been retained by a Chicago-based company to search for a Software Engineer for network architecture development experience for switches (Frame-Relay, or Token Ring, or ATM). This is a development position with a company that is working on cutting-edge technology for the telecommunications industry. If you have Senior Level Experience in Network management product development, please consider getting in touch with me. My client will be very agressive in terms of a compensation package. RESPONSIBILITIES: Responsible for defining and specifying system and new product architectures based upon requirements outlined in the business plan, by customers and marketing. Review and understand current industry capabilities in processors, busses, VLSI and software and determine their applicability for new designs. This individual must be capable of taking a design from the conceptual stages to manufacturing with little or no supervision and will assume a management role for scheduling and activities of a group of engineers. QUALIFICATIONS: Bachelor and/or Masters degree in electrical engineering, computer engineering or computer science. EXPERIENCE: 3-5 years experience in the design and development of complex networking or telecommunications products. Extensive knowledge of telecommunications and/or networking terminology, protocols and architectures. Detailed understanding of current technical issues in communications. CONTACT: This is a permanent position in the suburbs of Chicago. If you are interested, please contact Tony Brown, Ph.D. at the following e-mail address: TJBROWN@TIAC.NET Tony Brown, Ph.D. Owner & Executive Recruiter Omega Consulting http://people.delphi.com/tj_brown FAX: 617-729-7634 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 May 97 10:32:15 EDT Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming From: John R. Covert First I'd like to correct yet another error in my first message. The North American 1900 MHz bands consist of 3 30 MHz bands, A/B/C, and 3 10 MHz bands. I had incorrectly stated that only A/B were 30 MHz. In reply to an earlier message, nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) had written: > Why didn't the US carriers (including CDMA) use the same compatible SIM > technology? Would have worked, regardless of air interface! And I had replied: > Utter stupidity, I must say. The only benefit of not using SIM cards > is that it makes the phone slightly cheaper; the cost of the SIM card > slot mechanical and electrical interface probably adds about $20 to > the cost of the phone; well worth it in my opinion. I've done some more research. May I start by reminding everyone that the definition of "compatible" is "different". :-) The GSM SIM cards, it turns out, are not just generic devices storing subscriber information for retrieval by the mobile telephone. The subscriber's key, Ki, is stored within the card and not revealed to a mobile set. Instead, the GSM encryption algorithm, A5, is implemented in the microprocessor on board the SIM card. Revealed details about the A5 algorithm are sketchy, but I read a paper by Ross Anderson (http://chem.leeds.ac.uk/ICAMS/people/jon/a5.html) as well as a better one by David Margrave of George Mason University. The latter paper was more detailed, but has disappeared, possibly only because the person who had posted it may have changed internet providers. In particular, the A5 algorithm is an integral part of the entire GSM standard, using the 22-bit TDMA frame sequence number as one of its parameters. This specific tie-in to a TDMA frame sequence number would appear to make it unusable in the U.S. systems, which in the most common case have to execute the control-channel encryption algorithm used by all AMPS phones manufactured in the past two years (to end cloning). Both AMPS analog and AMPS digital TDMA and CDMA phones continue to do call setup on the same control channel (which was always a digital channel, even with purely analog AMPS phones). The control channel must be compatible for all three modes of operation, AMPS analog, AMPS digital TDMA, and AMPS digital CDMA. And the encryption algorithm for authentication must operate in this environment. There is a copy of the specification for the crypto system used by AMPS systems located at: http://www.replay.com/mirror/cave/ and a detailed discussion of the flaw in the algorithm can be found at the crypto consulting firm Counterpane Systems at http://www.counterpane.com/ My conclusion, based on what I've read so far, is that the U.S. and Canadian Carriers were unable to use GSM SIM card capability because it is _not_ _compatible_ with the existing systems in these two countries in such a fundamental way as to be unusable, first, on the dual-mode systems being built in the existing 850 MHz space, and second, on the new CDMA systems using some of the newer 1900 MHz spectrum (e.g. SprintPCS in Colorado). In addition, the GSM SIM cards are a _licensed_ technology, requiring systems using the SIM cards to implement the GSM standard, and not some different standard designed to meet different requirements. I'm glad that I chose Omnipoint, who _do_ use GSM SIM cards, being one of the 1900 MHz GSM carriers beginning operation in the United States together with Bell South DCS, Sprint Spectrum-APC (Washington, DC), Pac Bell, Western Wireless/Voicestream, Aerial, Powertel, PCS One, Pocket Communications, and (in Canada) Microcell/Fido. Customers of Omnipoint (and eventually the others) will be able to roam all over the world simply by taking their SIM card out of their 1900 MHz phone and inserting it into a 900 MHz or 1800 MHz phone. Information on Omnipoint, including nationwide and worldwide roaming information with links to some of their partner carriers in the U.S. and worldwide is available at http://www.omnipoint.com/welcome.htm (Omnipoint just added France this week to the list already shown on their web site.) /john ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 18:55:50 -0400 From: Minor Threat Subject: TV Interview With Two Hackers Banned From Computers TV.COM is a weekly, 30-minute television show devoted to topics of the Internet, online services, web pages and new computer technology. The May 17th show will feature interviews with two hackers who have been ordered by federal judges to stay away from computers after they were found guilty of committing computer and other crimes. Minor Threat will discuss the details of his ban from the Internet and how it will affect him when he is released and why he feels it is unfair. His crime was not computer-releated, but the judge believed he had the capability to electronically retaliate against the arresting officer by altering his credit rating and so, ordered an Internet ban placed on him. Minor Threat was interviewed early April at FCI Bastrop where he is currently serving a 70-month sentence. His web page is at www.paranoia.com/~mthreat/. Notorious computer hacker Kevin Poulsen was released from federal prison last summer after serving 51 months and is now struggling to cope with a life without computers. Having been surrounded by computers up until his capture in 1991, his life has drastically changed since he is currently prohibited from touching or being in the same room as one. He will discuss the difficulties he faces as a non-computer user in a high-tech environment. His web page is at www.catalog.com/kevin/. Please check the TV.COM web site (www.tv.com) for local time and channel listings in your area. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #116 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 12 03:26:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id DAA23605; Mon, 12 May 1997 03:26:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 03:26:28 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705120726.DAA23605@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #117 TELECOM Digest Mon, 12 May 97 03:26:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 117 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (George Gilder) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Anthony Argyriou) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Jerry Harder) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Thor Lancelot Simon) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (David Appell) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (A.E. Siegman) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Stewart Fist) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Eli Mantel) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Nils Andersson) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (robertd672@aol.com) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Robert Casey) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (wlevant@aol.com) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Sanjay Parekh) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (John R. Levine) Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (Richard Enteman) Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (oldbear@arctos.com) Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (jmolter@pitnet.net) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Sun, 11 May 1997 15:56:51 -0400 From: George Gilder Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study > The issue is whether those who use cell phones, etc. have a > statistically-significant higher increase in cancers than they would if > they did not use such devices or that they did before they used these > devices. > David > appell@together.net And of course this issue cannot be resolved in the face of a baffling complex of coincident and correlative factors and conditions, which can be summed up as industrial civilization itself with its associated measuring apparatus and vast increases in longevity. We are left with the choice of either overthrowing industrial civilization with all its overwhelming benefits (the choice of the radiophobes) or ignoring the latest legal target until conclusive scientific evidence is available. If every innovation had to face a prolonged barrage of speculative challenges, and endless courtroom speelunking for deep pockets, no innovation -- from the automobile to aspirin--could ever have been launched. Of course, the theory of global warming would have prohibited the industrial revolution itself. So far the enemies of cellphones have offered absolutely no evidence of interest except to the usual hypochondriacs with lawyers and rodents in tow (feeding on a now preposterous theory of linear human response to radiation). George Gilder ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 17:37:02 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com On Fri, 9 May 1997 10:17:05 EDT, gg@gilder.com (George Gilder) wrote: > On the contrary, voluminous recent evidence supports the proposition > of hormesis -- that radiation below a threshold not approached by > cellphones imparts a statistically significant increase in resistance > to cancers among humans. Perhaps that is why cellphone rich regions > such as Scandinavia and Japan lead the world in longevity and US users > of PCs and cellphones live longer than non users. In general, all > around the globe the use of electricity and other electromagnetic > oscillations correlates almost perfectly with greater longevity. It is doubtful that the EM exposure is the efficient cause of greater longevity in such areas, and cellular is definitely _not_ the cause, as those regions had higher lifespans before cellular. Much more likely is that high EM exposure and high longevity are both effects of the same cause, industrialization in a capitalist society. Confusion of cause and effect like this is what caused the idiocies of most third-world "development" schemes of the 60s and 70s (and continuing to this day). Cancer rates are higher in societies like Scandinavia, Japan, and the US than in the third world, because people live longer. Cancer is primarily a disease of old people, and when your society provides many colorful ways to die before the age of 50, you are not likely to live long enough to contract cancer. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ From: Jerry Harder Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: 11 May 1997 04:52:56 GMT Organization: RTA, Inc. pastark@cloud9.net wrote in article : > Stewart Fist (fist@ozemail.com.au) wrote: >> A doubling of tumours in 100 exposed mice, is not an insignificant finding. >> In fact, statistically, it is above the 1% level of confidence, and is >> therefore highly significant. > It is easy to make instant judgments on statements like this, but I > would like to see some specific data. For instance -- how many of > those 100 "exposed mice" actually had tumors? Suppose in a group of > 100 "unexposed" mice, one develops a tumor, whereas in a group of 100 > "exposed" mice two mice develop tumors. Is this significant? > Look at it another way: In one group of 100 male casino customers, one > person won money, whereas in a group of 100 female customers, two > people won money. Is this doubling of winning customers statistically > significant? Does it mean that women are inherently better gamblers? > Does it mean that the casino's machines are prejudiced against men? > One could put all sorts of spins on this ... In Israel, the {Jerusalem Post} announced Friday that the two cellular phone companies have agreed to finance a health study. This move is based on the Australian study. According to the article, Israelis should be particularly concerned since they have one of the world's highest rates of cellular phone usage. Jerry Harder Senior Partner RTA, Inc. ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: 11 May 1997 01:43:51 -0400 Organization: Panix Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com In article , George Gilder wrote: > Since cell phones are not exactly a rare technology, why on earth > should we pay any attention to the claims of carcinogenic effects > until the incidence of relevant cancers rises in the population using > the devices? For all the mumbo jumbo from the radiophobes with their > tortured rodents in tow, the fact is that there are fewer, not more, > brain tumors and other cancers among users of cellular phones, > computers, and other radiators, than among non users. Thus there is no > problem whatsoever to explain. Period. Okay, you said it; I didn't. A citation for each claim above, please? Without such, I don't see any reason why any TELECOM Digest reader ought to believe you, particularly considering that the other side of the argument was perfectly willing to provide them. Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com Stumbling drunk in the railyard looking for God: http://www.panix.com/~tls/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 07:54:11 -0400 From: David Appell Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study George Gilder wrote: > Since cell phones are not exactly a rare technology, why on earth > should we pay any attention to the claims of carcinogenic effects > until the incidence of relevant cancers rises in the population using > the devices? For all the mumbo jumbo from the radiophobes with their > tortured rodents in tow, the fact is that there are fewer, not more, > brain tumors and other cancers among users of cellular phones, > computers, and other radiators, than among non users. Thus there is no > problem whatsoever to explain. Period. Not really. Comparing users of cell phones (etc.) to non users of electronic devices introduces other factors that muddy the waters. Users of cell phones are likely to be more affluent than non users, and more likely to have a higher education, more aware of nutritional factors and thus more likely to have a better diet, probably likely to have better access to health care, including preventative care, etc. These might well be the factors that lead to lower incidences of cancers in the group of interest. The issue is whether those who use cell phones, etc. have a statistically-significant higher increase in cancers than they would if they did not use such devices or that they did before they used these devices. David appell@together.net ------------------------------ From: siegman@ee.stanford.edu (AES) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 12:51:21 -0700 Organization: Stanford University I would like to thank Robert Heller for taking the effort to write such a clear, non-inflammatory, and readable message summarizing why the Royal Adelaide Hospital study remains entirely unconvincing, to me anyway, and apparently also to him. In addition to salient the points he made (this study is an "outlier", with questionable dosimetry, questionable subjects, and questionable reproducibility), additional points that reinforce my skepticism include: Mechanism: Despite extensive study, essentially no identified or well-established basic physical mechanims have been found by which the claimed effects could be produced. Wider-scale epidemiology: When claims of health hazards allegedly caused by EMF radiation from computer video displays first began to appear, I recall someone pointing out that a massive world-wide experiment on such hazards had already been carried out, called *television*. If the claimed effects were real, we should by then have seen a massive epidemic of similar effects, and of course we hadn't (nor had there been any evidence of ill effects among professional TV production and broadcasting personnel, despite sitting for hours surrounded by industrial-strength TV monitors. If one looks around a bit, one can surely identify industrial (or military) personnel who routinely experience much greater exposure to radiation similar to cell phone emissions in their routine professional pursuits -- yet visible evidence of ill effects has yet to appear. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 14:43:48 +1000 From: fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study George Gilder writes: > Since cell phones are not exactly a rare technology, why on earth > should we pay any attention to the claims of carcinogenic effects > until the incidence of relevant cancers rises in the population > using the devices? Maybe because people would rather not subject their offspring to a global epidemic of serious health problems. Most people I know would rather science and technology looked ahead at the long-term consequences, rather than wait for problems to be solved (as they now are with cigarettes and asbestos) by litigation after the event. > For all the mumbo jumbo from the radiophobes with their > tortured rodents in tow, the fact is that there are fewer, not > more, brain tumors and other cancers among users of cellular > phones, computers, and other radiators, than among non users. Where in God's name did this 'fact' come from. George, if this is an example of how economists think then I have a new insight into the problems of trickle-down economics. You aren't distinguishing incidence of these diseases from the mortality rates (we can now cure many forms) and you are not distinguishing between gliomas (brain and nervous tissue), leukemias and lymphomas, and about fifty other problems -- many of which are on the rise. Only cancers related to smoking and smog seem to be on the decrease in developed countries. Why brand all people interested in this problem as 'radiophobes'. I was praising the virtues of CDMA mobile phones in print before you were, and I have long been writing about the benefits of shifting back to Digital Terrestrial Television system, rather than sinking billions in HFC cable. I think radio systems are superb - but that doesn't mean I think it is safe to stick a small microwave oven against the side of your head and pulse it on and off 217 times a second. The main researchers in this area can't remotely be described as radio-phobes. This is a cheap shot -- trying to label everyone who disagrees with you as being a 'nut'. That is childish. > Thus there is no problem whatsoever to explain. Period. That is about the most banal certainty that I've heard since the fundamentalists discovered the world was created in 1440BC. > On the contrary, voluminous recent evidence supports the > proposition of hormesis -- that radiation below a threshold not > approached by cellphones imparts a statistically significant > increase in resistance to cancers among humans. We seem to swing from one fundamentalist certainty to another. While hundreds of legitimate scientific studies are dismissed in one phrase -- suddenly, a miraculous cure for cancer is offered in another. I can only guess you are talking about Dr. Ross Adey's work -- which is on analog R/F. If so, you obviously aren't making the distinction between the pulsed stroboscopic nature of GSM digital (217Hz) and analog, and this difference is fundamental to everything that is being discussed in these questions. GSM has a R/F component and a pulsed (square wave) ELF component -- and it is generally thought that the ELF may be the problem. R/F may indeed become a useful tool in medicine, but only when we know what the mechanisms are. In the past radio engineers and manufacturers have denied there are any mechanisms -- or any problems. I'm not sure that anyone involved in this research now feels certain about the threshold argument -- nor to most scientists have any feeling as to what exposures (to humans) may be significant. However the Adelaide research did strongly suggest that exposure problems with pulsed GSM are cumulative in time. > Perhaps that is why cellphone rich regions such as Scandinavia > and Japan lead the world in longevity and US users of PCs and > cellphones live longer than non users. In general, all around the > globe the use of electricity and other electromagnetic oscillations > correlates almost perfectly with greater longevity. Dare I suggest that another factor could be poverty, and perhaps exposure to another thousand other environmental and nutritional factors. I can't believe that any serious economist would deal with cause and effect in such a simplistic way. > Unfortunately among the beneficiaries of this public health boon > are product liability lawyers and their junk science accomplices > causing lucrative plagues of hypochondria and litigation. Do you count in here the liability lawyers working for the State Attorney-Generals in prosecuting the tobacco companies? This liability lawyer problem is an American one; it is almost irrelevant in Europe and Australia (where this research was conducted), and it is a problem resulting from your fanatical 'let-the-buyer-beware' approach to non-regulation. Robert Weller writes: > The Royal Adelaide Hospital study is an "outlier," inasmuch as > most other studies failed to detect any increase in the cancer > risk ratio "Most other" is a rather vague term. If you mean cell-phone research, then this is only correct if you include all those studies that came to inconclusive results. You can't prove a null hypothesis. There are plenty of well known, well conducted studies which say the opposite -- and none of them is conclusive, because no individual study of this type will ever be conclusive. Each, in its own way, is indicative. > Dosimetry There's a hell of a lot more to dosmetrics than this. Each research protocol has its problems. Mice are a bit too small to strap cell-phones to their ears, so they had to do with an antenna over the cage. This placed the mice in the far field, but at power-densities equivalent to the side of the head. The aluminium would simply have evened out the distribution and reduced the variations in body orientation. Scientist can actually measure power-densities, and set their experiments accordingly. > Subjects. While I am less familiar with this area, the transgenic > mice used in the research had genetic alterations in areas that > are not contained in the human genome. The study set out to establish whether GSM phone radiation could promote (not cause) tumorous changes in mice cells. Since at the cell level DNA-is-DNA, and this is the most likely cause of tumours, then surely it established something worth while which has a high degree of relevance to humans. It does not prove that GSM phones produce cancer -- but it says loud and clear, "We had better find out damn quick". The other criticisms here are objecting to this being a part-solution to a long-term problem; the writer want it to be a total solution. Scientists can argue for days about the use of different strains of mice, so I doubt that this engineer's opinion of which mice should have been used is necessarily better than the combined resources of the Australian National Health & Medical Research Council, Telstra, and the scientists involved. > The FDA has been pushing the Wireless Technology Research > (WTR) organization, funded in the US by an industry blind trust, > to use rats rather than transgenic mice. From what I can see, the FDA has been pushing the WTR to spend the last few million of their $25 million budget just doing anything. Pete writes about the findings of double the tumour rate in exposed mice, and the 1% level of significance. > It is easy to make instant judgments on statements like this, but > I would like to see some specific data. You got the 'relevant' data -- the tumour rate doubled in only 18 months. The specific is in the paper itself, available for anyone to read. > For instance -- how many of those 100 "exposed mice" actually > had tumors? Suppose in a group of100 "unexposed" mice, one > develops a tumor, whereas in a group of 100 "exposed" mice two > mice develop tumors. Is this significant? The 'level of significance' concept used in all scientific work grades results as either 5% (the results could have arisen one in every twenty times by chance) or 1% (once in a hundred). These results were above this higher level of significance. That is why the scientists provide these figures, so non-scientists will have some judgment of the relative importance of the evidence and chance factors. It doesn't help you to know that the transgenic control mice had 22 tumours, and the exposed had 43 (after an adjustment down), because you don't know whether the 22 is a high or a low figure. Some 'normal' lab mice strains have 100% tumour rates in 18 months, some are down at the 5% level. These mice were from a low-susceptible (5% strain) which had the gene inserted about 10 years ago to make them 'sensitive' to environmental effects. (Note 'sensitive') In other words, these mice are sensitive detectors - and the better the signal-to-noise ratio they have, the more trust we can put in the detection. Stewart Fist, Technical writer and journalist. Current Australian columns: Archives of my columns are available at the Australian and also at the ABC site: Development site: Phone:+612 9416 7458 Fax: +612 9416 4582 Old Homepage: [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not that it is critical or important to Mr. Fist's response at all, but I would like to correct one small error. The religious fundamentalists do not claim the 'world was created in 1440 BC'. Most fundamentalists agree with the conclusions drawn by Archbishop Usher in the early seventeenth century after considerable study and calculations done by the Archbishop: the world was created on Tuesday, October 14, 4004 BC at 9:30 AM. He did not say what time zone that was; ie. Greenwich Mean Time, Eastern, etc. However King James had his own scholars review Usher's work and they concluded he was accurate. Thus when King James ordered a revision and updating of the scriptures in 1612 AD, Usher's calculations were used in the concordances or footnotes of that edition of the Bible. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Eli Mantel Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 18:52:17 PDT I'm certain that I'm missing some essential aspect of the network access charges, but it seems to me that a critical error was made in how these fees were imposed and allocated in the years since long distance service was opened to full competition. Prior to this time, local phone companies had been receiving a credit based on billings for long distance calls originating or terminating in their area. Continuing that in the same form would have substantially impeded competition, while totally eliminating it would have threatened the phone companies' financial stability. Access charges were never intended to reflect the cost for the local phone company to provide any service, just to replace the value of the revenue stream that they had been credited with for long distance calls at the instant in time that deregulation went into effect. Over the years, as the number of phone lines and the amount of long distance have increased, it would seem that these access charges have probably grown to the point at which they substantially exceed the revenue stream they were intended to replace. As these access charges have grown, local phone companies have become dependent on this increased revenue stream. Had the access fees been reduced to reflect the increased volumes, the significance of the fees would have decreased over time, and we would have been seeing both categories of access fees reduced annually over each of the past 13 years. I've been wondering what's wrong with my thinking for a while, so I hope someone can clarify this situation for me. Thanks. Eli Mantel --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 22:02:12 -0400 From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? In article , The Old Bear writes: > One should not think of this as a surcharge on multiple lines, but > instead as a surcharge on *ALL* lines with each "household" getting > a single exemption. Under that perspective, it begins to make a > little more administrative sense. Logically, this is what a lawyer would call a distinction without a difference. It is, however, a perfect example of how sematics can be used to manipulate the appearance, in this case by trying to establish a different "baseline" against which to compare a new phenomenon. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: robertd672@aol.com (RobertD672) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: 12 May 1997 04:57:18 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com A second line on the same residential bill perhaps? In all of the examples you mentioned which had multiple occupants in a shared living space each of the phone bills would be in the name of the person for whom the service was installed (trust me, a landlord does not want a tenants utilities in their name.) Therfore, each initial line would be charged at the primary rate. If in fact there was more that one line on a bill then that line would be charged at the "second line" rate. The people who will mainly be paying this are the ones who either have computer equipment or a fax machine for which they want a dedicated line or parents with minor children living at home (as minors are not capable of entering into agreements in most localities.) > Here's another one for you: What happens if there is a single phone > line in the home of a married couple, and it happens to be in the > husband's name only. Now the wife has a need for her own phone line, > so she applies for one in her name, and is told she will have to pay > the higher charge. If she applies for the line in her name I would think that she would be billed at the primary rate. As an aside, what need would a married couple have for private lines? If they are for business purposes then they would be charged at business rates and handled by the business department. In other word residential tariffs would not apply. > This is, after all, a form of discrimination . . . you get service > at one price if it's the only line into a building, but you may pay a > higher price just because you choose to, or are forced to by economic > considerations, live in the same building as someone else who already > has phone service. Not if the bills are in seperate names. > My final thought is that I don't even think this will have the > desired effect of recovering revenue lost from the lowering of "access > ... otherwise have been ordered, will more than offset any gains made > by increased access charges on additional residential phone lines. First of all, the decrease in access charges will be recouped from a new charge to the long distance companies of between $1.50 (residential) and $2.75 (business) for multi-line customers as well as additional rate increases for multi-line business customers. Second, I am sure that the phone companies would be very happy if everyone (excluding of course business customers) were to cancel service for more than one line. It would prevent them from having to spend money to upgrade equipment and capacity to handle the explosion in phone service. At any rate the money will be recouped mainly from multi-line business customers. In addition the telcos are targeting ISPs for additional rate hikes because of the traffic they have added to the phone system. In effect the current rate increases have already hit them, try that $1.50 or so a month by several hundred lines to several thousand lines and see what it adds to your overhead (Hint: A LOT!). Strangely enough most of the RBOCs (henceforth "fat bastards") either already have or are in the process of rolling out Internet access. While they are affected by the current rate increase and would also be affected by any "ISP tax" (Internet access is unregulated) look at who they are paying the phone bills to. The fat bastards can easily absorb the extra cost (not only because they are in effect feeding themselves but also because they do not have seperate expenses for billing, advertising, etc) while many smaller local ISPs will lose a substantial amount of revenue. Of course I am sure that this would not phase the fat bastards, and it may in fact make them very happy because it would add gold to their coffers. My final thought is this. I don't actually see the baby Bells as being very succesful in the role of ISP. Yes, they will maintain a certain number of subscribers who may not even know that a better alternative is literaly right down the street. Overall though I don't think that they have the skills needed to prosper. Internet access is a very customer sevice oriented business, customer service and the word Bell (in any derivative form i.e. Pac Bell, Bell Atlantic) don't work well in the same sentence. I don't think that this will turn out to be the big gravy bowl that they expected. I could be wrong, I hope I am not. I am just waiting to see the costs for local loops go up substantially. Well, enough of my rants for now. I just got my latest phone bills and had to vent somehow. Please cc any comments, flames, etc. to me directly. I would love to hear your thoughts. Rob D. ------------------------------ From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 03:27:36 GMT If the second line shows on the same phone bill as the first, than the phone company gets to charge extra for it. If you tell the phone company you have created a seperate apartment in a part of your house, and give them a bogus name (or maybe give them your wife's middle name and maiden name) they probably couldn't tell the difference and you'd have two 1st lines. And two seperate phone bills. For a buck fifty, I doubt most people will really care. ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 21:17:34 EDT Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line ? I seriously doubt that even our intrepid federal government would attempt to characterize a multi-tenant apartment building as a "residence", as has been suggested. On the other hand, at our house (a single home), we have two POTS lines. One's in my name; the other's in my wife's. They aren't billed together, and otherwise have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Our last names are different, too. How can the telco decide that "we" really have two lines? We also have two kids and four cats. Guess that means we can get six more POTS lines at the "first line" rate :-) Come and get us, coppers. When the FCC characterizes something as "the greatest day for telephone consumers since the breakup of AT&T in 1984", you should consider it fair warning. Run -- don't walk -- to the exits. And hold on to your wallet. And one last, random thought. Maybe this is a silly question, but when PAT said "Western Union['s telephone number] was (of course) 4321" ... why "of course" ? Bill [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In nearly every community where there resided a Western Union facility or a telegraph agent (generally affiliated with Western Union as an independent contractor providing 'telegraph services') the phone number was something-4321. This was true at least throughout the midwestern United States. An interesting exception was here in Chicago where the main switchboard for the Western Union Building and their executive offices at 410 S. LaSalle Street was WABash-2-4321 but the phone room for the message takers and telegraphers was WABash-2-7111. (But from a coin telephone, dial the operator and ask for Western Union). All the outlying neighborhood offices in Chicago were owned by the Company (I think, maybe a couple were not) and they were all something-4321. My copy of the 1946 issue of the great big 26-page phone directory for Coffeyville, Kansas issued by the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company has only a few dozen entries under the letter 'W', one being: WESTERN UNION AGENCY ......... Bus Terminal Bldg, 8th & Walnut ... 4321 If calling from a pay station, ask operator for Western Union. A phone book from about 1959-60 for Evanston, Illinois showed that a WUTCO agent was located on or near the campus of Northwestern Univer- sity with the phone number DAVis-8-4321. But the same entry noted that 'if calling from a pay telephone, dial operator and ask for Western Union.' An office on the south side of Chicago was HYDe Park-3-4321, again with the special instruction for pay phone users. Probably since sometime around 4004 BC at 9:30 AM the WUTCO and the Bell had a very close, almost incestuous relationship. People now-days complain about non-telephone call related billings appearing on the phone bill, i.e horoscopes and sex, but WUTCO billed on the phone bill for probably seventy years. The reason payphone users had to ask the operator for Western Union rather than dial something-4321 was because the operator would alert the WUTCO message taker that in effect there was no phone number to be billed. The operator would tell the WUTCO person the caller was at a payphone. After the caller gave the message to be sent to the WUTCO person, the clerk would say 'okay please flash your hook and get the operator back on the line ...' the caller would jiggle the hook and when the operator responded, the WUTCO person would say 'collect seventy five cents from the caller' (or whatever the message cost) and the caller had to deposit that in the coin box on the payphone. Having done so, the local operator then had to 'dump the coins' meaning hit a key on the switchboard which caused the table in the phone to tip in the company's favor rather than tip the other way sending the coins back out the return slot. If the caller had dialed something-4321 direct, there would be no way to flash the operator for 'assistance in collecting' as they referred to it. People of course committed fraud all the time; they would tell WUTCO the wrong number for billing purposes. There were certain 'established' phone numbers in those days. In addition to WUTCO having 4321 almost everywhere, you could count on the telco business office being something-9411. Again, oddly, in Chicago all the public business offices (literally a dozen or more, walk in off the street, sit down and talk to a service rep) were something-9411. In manual offices they were just 9411 although as often as not the caller would lift the receiver and just say to the operator 'give me the business office'. But in the case of Illinois Bell's big corporate headquarters in downtown Chicago, the corporation PBX was OFFicial-3-9411 while the service reps down on the first floor were OFFicial-3-9100. In quite a few communities the police were 2121 and the firemen were 2131. But, when you had two communities served by the same central office and each maintained their own police/fire departments then the 'other' one was 2151 and 2181. Don't ask me why. In some places police were 1212 and fire was 1313. Telephone recorded announcement services were quite often 1234 or 1515. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 09:58:43 -0400 From: Sanjay Parekh Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Jack Decker wrote: > charges" on toll calls. The reason is that as the cost of additional > lines increases, many people may disconnect existing second lines, or > put off ordering additional lines, or figure out ways to make exiting > lines do double-duty (for example, making one line serve both a > computer and FAX machine). I have a gut feeling that the number of > disconnections, and the lost business from additional lines that would > otherwise have been ordered, will more than offset any gains made by > increased access charges on additional residential phone lines. The business I'm in (cable telephony) is directly impacted by this. But that raises an interesting question. How do you know and control rates when one line is provided by one company, say an RBOC, and an "additional" line is provieded by another company, say a cable company? Also, do cell phones count as "additional" lines? They can provide secondary dialtone in the same house as a normal line. It's gonna be a whole new can of worms ... | Sanjay Parekh | | sanjay.parekh@arris-i.com | | Systems Engineer - Cornerstone | | Arris Interactive | | Atlanta, GA | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 May 97 10:32 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > My point is this: Whatever you may think of the rest of the FCC's > actions, the idea of mandating different rates for exactly the same > service, simply because someone has more than one line coming into the > home, seems like an idea that would make sense only to a government > bureaucrat. I agree it's a pretty lame idea, but it shouldn't be all that hard to administer because telcos already have special cases for additional lines. In some states such as New Jersey there's a different, lower, rate for second lines. In every state I'm aware of, second lines can be unlisted at no charge, even in Massachusetts where for some idiotic reason you can't put two residential lines on one bill. On the other hand, I have two lines at my house and one at my cottage, all three on the same bill. Does the cottage phone count as an additional line? Who the heck knows? Seems to me the fairest and easiest way to collect USF money is with a small increase to the gross receipts tax on all telephone service. That's easy to administer and doesn't cause distortions. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ From: Richard Enteman Subject: Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 18:39:09 PDT lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) wrote: > Per the talk about 911 ... > I was in Philadelphia and noticed the fire alarm pull > boxes were gone. > I was wondering if other cities have removed their boxes. > They've been gone in Trenton NJ for years. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The reason [the boxes are > gone] is they were subject to too much abuse. People who like to play > games would pull the alarm on a street corner box then run off before > the firemen arrived to find nothing going on. With 911 working as > effeciently as it does, and the prevalence of telephones, there is no > longer any real need for the boxes anyway. PAT] The police and fire boxes often run on separate lines with their own power supply. They serve as an important back-up system. During power outages the police and fire boxes are often the only means of communications. To minimize the number of false alarms many fire alarm boxes had microphones added for dispatcher to talk with someone reporting an emergency. Things go in cycles, and the call boxes are bound to come back again someday after the large expense of removing them. ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 05:16:36 -0400 lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) writes: > I was in Philadelphia and noticed the fire alarm pull boxes were gone. > They used to be mounted on utility poles at corners. As a child, we > were trained to know where the nearest pull box was to our home. If > we used it, we were to wait there for the fire truck so they'd know > where to go. Fire drill posters in buildings included the nearest > street pull box. . . >In the early 1970s I had a tour of the Philadelphia fire dispatching > center (this was pre-911 days.) At that time, it seemed most calls > came via boxes, not the telephone. A pullbox caused a loud oscillator > to beep the four digit code of the box. (I think the beep was > duplicated in the fire house that served the location, but I'm not > sure). The dispatcher identified the location, and telephoned > (through a private direct line PBX) the fire house to provide details. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The boxes have been gone in Chicago > for years with the exception of schools, hospitals and residences > for geriatric patients (old people's homes) where they are required > by law. The reason is they were subject to too much abuse. People > who like to play games would pull the alarm on a street corner box > then run off before the firemen arrived to find nothing going on. > With 911 working as effeciently as it does, and the prevalence of > telephones, there is no longer any real need for the boxes anyway. PAT] The boxes are part of the "Gamewell System" which dates back to 1852. Gamewell is still very much in business -- and even has a web site at URL: < http://www.gamewell.com >. The familiar red pull boxes were based on classic DC telegraph technology. A single DC loop (wire pair) was run many locations in a neighborhood and each location would have a Gamewell box which contained a spring-driven internal sprocket wheel with teeth notched in a unique pattern. When a citizen would pull the lever on the outside of the box, the spring would be wound and the wheel would then turn, activating a switch which would close the circuit on the loop, sounding a gong in the local fire house. Because each box had a unique number, the firemen could then identify which box had been pulled and proceed to that location. In small towns, the system might activate an air-horn or steam whistle which would muster the volunteer fire company. The pattern of whistle blasts, for example 3-4-1, would identify the location so that volunteers could rush directly to the site and meet up with the crew bring the equipment from the firehouse. Many of the boxes also contained an old-fashion morse code key inside the box, which could be unlocked by the arriving firemen and used to send messages back to the firehouse. Certainly quaint by today's standards! The beauty of the system was its simplicity. The electro-mechanical assemblies were very reliable. The fire departments liked the system because it provided a positive identification of location and there were no problems with trying understand a panicy or non-English speaking citizen on a poor quality early telephone system. I worked with the City of Boston in 1969-72, and I recall a number of discussions about the pros and cons of the Gamewell system. At that time, there was considerable urban unrest from both anti-war protests and inner-city disturbances. (Fortunately, Boston remained quite civil although local government was concerned the unpleasantness of other cities might spread.) It was decided that a few false alarms were preferable to the risks involved in replacing the system with one which required citizens to use a telephonic system. Anyway, the city had long since stopped maintaining its own wires in most locations and was getting dry copper from New England telephone for the purposes of the Gamewell system. One of the Fire Department technicians had been experimenting with what other data or voice they might be able to run over the same copper loops, but datacom in those days was pretty primitive. One of the things which we looked at was using the system for security alarms on public buildings. The idea was to provide a second set of numeric codes to indicate breaking-and-entering at the public schools and then filtering those signals to the police or school department security people. Unfortuantely, the issue of life-safety was considered so important the the state legislature decades earlier had manadated that the fire alarm systems in schools be separate from any other telephone or telegraph device -- thus the limitation was legislative rather than technical. By the way, if you like those Western Union clocks which were discussed in TELECOM Digest a while back, you'd probably love to look at the insides of the old Gamewell apparatus. The fire alarm call boxes are elegant assemblies of brass gears and contactors, beautifully machined to the highest standards of their day to assure maximum reliability. And on the firehouse end, there was equally intersting equipment, including paper tape printers which, looking like time-recording seismographs, used spring driven clockworks and ink pens mounted on the ends of magnetic arms to keep a permanent record of the exact time and date of each alarm. Or, as Ogden Nash wrote: The one-L lama is a priest. The two-L llama is a beast. But I will bet a silk pajama, there isn't any three-L lllama. (*) (*) Some readers informed Mr. Nash that this was a type of large conflagration -- to which Mr. Nash said, "pooh." Cheers, The Old Bear ------------------------------ From: jmolter@pitnet.net (JeepMan) Subject: Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 08:21:40 GMT In Milwaukee WI they discontinued the pull boxes in 1988 due to abuse of them. The pull box was in a police call box on all the corners. Pull box one side unlocked and on other side police call phone. Locked. About half of the police call boxes were removed in 1988 the other half are still in service. You can still see quite a lot of them on corners. (Painted blue) These are for the police to use to call in to stations. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #117 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 12 04:35:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id EAA27254; Mon, 12 May 1997 04:35:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 04:35:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705120835.EAA27254@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #118 TELECOM Digest Mon, 12 May 97 04:35:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 118 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway (Rick DeMattia) Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway (G Novosielski) Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway (Tony Toews) GSM SIMS and Crypto (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Rick DeMattia) Re: 911 and Payphones (Chris Farrar) Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Bemson) Interesting Article in NY Times on Rural Telephony (John R. Levine) Good Use for Unnecessary Phone Books (Tom Crofford) Re: What's the Status of the Lawsuit Against Destiny Telecom? (centex) Call Display (Caller ID) Formats? (Rob Barnhardt) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Subject: Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 13:59:32 GMT Reply-To: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Organization: Railnet BBS +1 216 786 0476 As quoted from by Paul Robinson : > This doesn't make any sense, because in order to register for the > service, a user's computer will connect to the registration server by > dialing a toll-free number... > call waiting. If they select "disable call waiting", it is smart enough > to give them the *70 code and even allowing them to change it if, for > example, they have pulse dial. Pulse dial is the key to the problem. If the new customer indicates that they have pulse dial, and also indicates that they have call waiting, one ISP package (ATT WORLDNET in an older version which I set up for my father) puts *70 into the dialing prefix. The * gets swallowed and the phone then dials 701800... It took us a while to figure this out - listening to the pulses was a clue. Rick DeMattia ------------------------------ Organization: GPN Consulting Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 13:19:36 -0400 From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Information In TELECOM Digest V17 #115, Paul Robinson wrote: > I got a call from a woman who is not a user of the service, but a > victim. ... [P]eople trying to use the service are calling her ... > virtually any hour of the day or night. The woman's number > would be something like 701-8001 in this example... but her number is > completely different from the number of the registration server.... > That's when it hit me. Well, it hit me as soon as I saw the number. As you noted, that software uses the *70 code even for users who have pulse dialing. Most modems will simply ignore the * code when they are in pulse mode, without generating an error. The proper code to use on a pulse line is 1170, and this code will usually work for touch-tone users too. Software designers are universally lax with their dialing strings, so while this programmer was irresponsible, he or she is far from unique. The proper way to dial a number with a leading *67, 1167, *70, 1170, or ANY OTHER feature or dialing code that presents a second dialtone is to send the "W" command (Wait for dial tone) at the appropriate place in the dialing string, i.e.: *70W1-800-123-4567 Had this been done, the woman never would have received those nuisance calls. Since dialing 70 on a pulse-only line would not have produced a second dial tone, the dialing would have failed at that point. The common practice of using a comma merely causes a timed pause, which can never 'fail' as such. Although the W command is supported by every modem I've ever owned (well okay, not my 300 baud acuoustic coupler, but every Hayes compatible of 2400 baud or better) it is almost NEVER used by people writing programs that talk to the modems. The worst offender was the America Online software, which had an internal filter of "valid" characters that could be sent to the modem while dialing. The the letter W was NOT one of the valid characters in their default configuration! The string was something like: 0123456789*#,TP So even if you were sharp enough to replace the code "*70," with "*70W", in the dialing string, the filter would silently strip out the W as if it weren't even there. As a result, the modem would not wait for the second dialtone, and would no longer even pause briefly, since the comma was now missing. This was worse than not modifying it at all. Although the filter itself was user modifiable, it was hidden several levels deep in dialog boxes. And, since the situation never kicked an error message, there was little that would prompt even a knowledgeable user to look for it and add the W character to it. I wrote to AOL about the problem back then, but I haven't dealt with them in years now, so I don't know if they ever fixed it. I know it was a widespread problem with nearly every setup file in their extensive modem configuration library. Gary Novosielski mailto:gpn@techie.com PGPInfo: KeyID A6172089 GPN Consulting http://idt.net/~gpn 2C 5C 32 94 F4 FF 08 10 B6 E0 DE 4F A2 43 79 92 ------------------------------ From: ttoews@telusplanet.net (Tony Toews) Subject: Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 05:20:40 GMT Organization: TELUS Communications Inc. Paul Robinson wrote: > At another place, I work for another company answering Technical Support > telephone calls for an Internet Service Provider. > That's when it hit me. Congratulations on figuring out the problem. Many people would've shrugged their shoulders. Others would have thought about it for a few minutes and forgotten about it. Reminds of the story I heard, likely in this newsgroup, about the woman whose phone number she'd had for many years was similar to a brand new large hotel. She'd get many mis-dialed calls for the hotel. She tried talking to someone at the hotel but get a rude reception. She then started confirming all the room reservations she got. Then the front desk had to deal with all the angry customers who had no reservations. They got a very bad reputation. Tony Toews, Independent Computer Consultant The Year 2000 crisis: Will my parents or your grand parents still be receiving their pension in January, 2000? See www.granite.ab.ca/year2000 for more info. Microsoft Access Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The newspapers here reported last week that a family in Ohio had a phone number very similar to Papa Don's Pizza. They were getting a lot of wrong number calls to order pizza, so they put an answering machine on their line identifying themselves as Papa John's Pizza and advising the caller that the Board of Health had closed them down. The recording further suggested ordering from Pizza Hut or Dominoes. The real Papa Don's sued them on account of it and a judge ordered the family to change the message on their answering machine. Regards the woman getting phone calls for the hotel, admittedly the hotel should not have been rude to her about it, but at the same time I wonder what she expected *them* to do about it. Ignorance, they say, is bliss, and a lot of Americans are very happy people. By taking reservations, she was defrauding the hotel. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rishab Aiyer Ghosh Subject: GSM SIMS and Crypto Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 14:31:42 +-5-30 John R. Covert writes: > The GSM SIM cards, it turns out, are not just generic devices storing > subscriber information for retrieval by the mobile telephone. The > subscriber's key, Ki, is stored within the card and not revealed to a > mobile set. Instead, the GSM encryption algorithm, A5, is implemented > in the microprocessor on board the SIM card. GSM is great in terms of security, compared with any other standard. The sub key is just for authentication, and is not the key used for call encryption. that is generated on the fly, usually once per call but technically possible to generate any number of encryption keys. apart from a5, the traffic encryption protocol, there are others, incl a8, the authentication protocol. almost everything is implemented on a chip on the sim card, which is what makes it so secure in practical terms. e.g. we all know about sim portability - use on any phone. but you can also protect your phone from being stolen by locking it to your sim - so it won't work with another card. > Revealed details about the A5 algorithm are sketchy, but I read a paper > by Ross Anderson (http://chem.leeds.ac.uk/ICAMS/people/jon/a5.html) as > well as a better one by David Margrave of George Mason University. The I posted long ago on cypherpunks and in Cellular-Digest on the gsm auth/crypto cycle. you'll probably find that if you search for "gsm crypto" or something like that on the web, as versions of that post seem to have been archived all over the place. i think www.l0pht.com has a copy, and i can probably excavate my archives and find it. -rishab First Monday - The Peer-Reviewed Journal on the Internet http://www.firstmonday.dk/ Munksgaard International Publishers, Copenhagen Managing Editor - Rishab Aiyer Ghosh (ghosh@firstmonday.dk) Mobile +91 11 98110 14574; Fax +91 11 2209608; Tel +91 11 2454717 A4/204 Ekta Apts., 9 Indraprastha Extn, New Delhi 110092 INDIA ------------------------------ From: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Subject: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 13:49:09 GMT Reply-To: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Organization: Railnet BBS +1 216 786 0476 I heard on the radio yesterday that the City of Parma, a suburb of Cleveland OH, is considering legislation which would require that all telephones within the municipal boundaries be in the same area code. Presumably this is in response to the pending split of 216. Whether municipal government has authority over the topic is another issue, of course. Rick DeMattia [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chris Farrar Subject: Re: 911 and Payphones Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 18:38:51 -0400 Organization: Sympatico Reply-To: cfarrar@sympatico.ca Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > A few years back, here in New Orleans, the city was going to fine > businesses or impose a surcharge on false alarms from burglar alarm or > fire alarm systems when the 'official' police or fire department (or > one of the other law enforcement jurisdictions) answered the call. Cities in Ontario are already doing that. Some are even going so far as to charge a "licencing fee" for even having a Burglar Alarm. > As for false calls to 911, a few months back, I seem to remember that > the city's 911 system was *NOT* going to send out a police car to > investigate if the 'hang-up' call came from a payphone. Just as in other > major metro areas, here in New Orleans, fools or kids dial 911, usually > from payphones, just for the sick 'fun' of it. Do they still respond when it isn't from a payphone? Here, dialing 911 and dropping the phone will result in the location receiving a tiered responce, basically Fire, Police, and Ambulance responding. Chris Farrar | cfarrar@sympatico.ca | Amateur Radio, a VE3CFX | fax +1-905-457-8236 | national resource PGPkey Fingerprint = 3B 64 28 7A 8C F8 4E 71 AE E8 85 31 35 B9 44 B2 ------------------------------ From: Bemson Subject: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 00:23:27 -0400 Organization: Gilgamesh Technologies & Designs Firm Reply-To: waf6@columbia.edu Hello, My family and I benefited greatly from a research report posted about the dangers of cellular phone usage in association with brain tumors and cancers. I know little to nothing about phones or electronics, so I would like to know if cordless phones pose a similar threat, or to understand how the differences in engineering make have not caused a concern for cordless phones. T,T,TIA Best O'Luck! Bemson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 00:50:52 EDT From: John R Levine Subject: Interesting Article in NY Times on Rural Telephony It's the lead article in the business section of today's (Monday's) Times. Also on the web at: http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/rural-phoneservice.html (registration required but no charge, at least to readers in the U.S.) They profile a rural Vermont phone company and point out the threat that the new telecom act poses to universal service in rural areas, as universal service fund money is siphoned off to new worthy activities unrelated to the original goals of USF. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 PS: Incidentally, the guy in the picture installing the phone is my uncle. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 19:43:37 -0500 From: Tom Crofford Reply-To: tomc@xeta.com Organization: XETA Corporation Subject: Good Use for Unnecessary Phone Books Pat, Yesterday was Mother's Day and we were having lunch with my mother-in-law. We're sitting at the dining room table eating some pizza and playing dominoes. My son notices a phone book under the table so he asks why it's there. My mother-in-law says she has trouble with chairs being too high, as she's about 5 feet tall. She gets tons of unrequested phone books, so she's using one as a foot prop under the dining room table. She further enhanced her phone book by wrapping it with plastic wrap, so it won't open while she's using it in this manner. You might pass along this low tech use of unnecessary phone books to the folks on your mailing list. I'm sure there are many more good uses for items like this we all receive every day. Thanks, Tom Crofford tomc@xeta.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sorry I neglected over the weekend to send out a note of cheer to all you Mothers in the digest audience. As the late Mike Royko once pointed out, it is unfortunate that a word which once stood for decency and the family and all that now can be considered the short form of a two-word obscene expression. Or, as the little ten year old kids on the school playground say when they are arguing with one another, 'Yo Mama!' PAT] ------------------------------ From: Central Texas Alliance Subject: Re: What's the Status of the Lawsuit Against Destiny Telecom? Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 10:57:19 -0500 Organization: Central Texas Alliance of Independent Representatives Reply-To: CentexDestiny@CyberServices.com Liz Ashraph wrote: > Does anyone know if the lawsuit against Destiny has been settled or > where that stands? Destiny Telecomm settles lawsuit with DAs, state No wrongdoing found; Destiny signs to save Oakland jobs Oakland (March 19) -- In a good-faith effort to keep its fast growing telecommunications company and jobs in Oakland -- and without admitting wrongdoing -- Destiny Telecomm settled a controversial lawsuit brought by the District Attorneys of Almeda, Monterey and the state Attorney General. Destiny attorneys contend that the company and its employees were targeted by misguided officials in an action that put hundreds of Oakland jobs at risk. Destiny and the government officials signed the agreement in order to end the litigation. The settlement contains reporting requirements, but does not require Destiny to make any substantive changes in its national marketing and sales program. The judgement, states it is not an "admission or evidence of wrongdoing" by Destiny. The settlement requires Destiny to pay $1.6 million to the three agencies. Destiny is here to stay! For more information on Destiny simply mailto:CentexDestiny@CyberServices.com or visit our Webpage at http://www.isot.com/personal/jeffurs/destiny.htm or our corporate site at http:/www.dtiinc.com ------------------------------ From: robertb@iaw.com (Rob Barnhardt) Subject: Call Display (Caller ID) Formats? Reply-To: robertb@iaw.com Organization: Rob Barnhardt Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 23:48:52 GMT (Please skip to the end if you just want to see the question. :) I've looked at a bunch of Caller ID utilities and found none that do everything I'd like - and those that come closest are, in my opinion, just too damn bloated. (So, write your own, you whiner. Okay. >:) (To the authors of those Caller ID programs - I might diss your code, but I do completely respect your ability to gather information. >:) I've had very little luck in finding concrete information on 'real-world' Caller ID formats. After finding what initially appeared to be a gold-mine - - and dutifully following just about every link there, I now know how to use several ICs to decode Caller ID, and I know what various legislatures have had to say about Caller ID and privacy. I feel really well-informed - just not in the way I had hoped. >:) No flame intended; it's a fine links page for general Caller ID info. Right. I then retrieved complete manuals for several of the major manufacturers' Caller ID-supporting modems, and therein learned how to configure those modems to report Caller ID information - which will be useful - but I still haven't found what I'm looking for. (tm) Anyhow, to the question: is there a good source for Caller ID formats out there? I'm interested in info for any country, any device, just so long as it's reasonably solid; frustratingly, among those documents that have provided relevant information, I don't think I've found _two_ that agreed completely. Do I have to start reverse-engineering Visual Basic programs? (Shh. >:) Thanks, Rob Barnhardt, robertb@iaw.com. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #118 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 14 03:00:41 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id DAA07415; Wed, 14 May 1997 03:00:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 03:00:41 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705140700.DAA07415@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #119 TELECOM Digest Wed, 14 May 97 03:00:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 119 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Dave Barry in Cyberspace" by Barry (Rob Slade) AG's Want Tougher Pay-Per-Call Rules (Tad Cook) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (John Cropper) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Steven Colins) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (K.M. Peterson) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Mark Steiger) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (A.T. Sampson) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Larry Daffner) Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users (J Colbert) Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users (Al Varney) Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway (James Bellaire) Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway (Andy Sherman) Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 13 May 1997 14:05:00 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Dave Barry in Cyberspace" by Barry BKDBRYCB.RVW 970128 "Dave Barry in Cyberspace", Dave Barry, 1996, 0-517-59575-3, U$22.00/C$27.00 %A Dave Barry %C 201 E. 50th St., 31st Floor %D 1996 %G 0-517-59575-3 %I Random House/Crown %O U$22.00/C$27.00 +1-212-572-2750, +1-212-751-2600, +1-800-726-0600 %O fax: +1-212-572-4997 abiggert@randomhouse.com 74261.2352@compuserve.com %P 215 %T "Dave Barry in Cyberspace" I have long suspected that a significant factor in successful humour or comedy is close and keen observation. Chapter twelve of "Dave Barry in Cyberspace" is thirty three pages long. "Chat" (cf. BKCHAT.RVW) by Nan McCarthy, is over a hundred pages long. Both deal with the same topic. McCarthy is trying to make a Point. Barry only has to be amusing. By the time I was two thirds of the way through "Chat", I really couldn't have cared less about what happened to the two protagonists. By the time I had read ten pages of chapter twelve, I doubt that I could have stopped before reading through to the end. McCarthy has been a participant, and knows some of the forms. But Barry has also been an observer, and he understands. Dave Barry is hilariously funny. When he wants to, though, he can *write*. OK, now for the thousands of you who passed around the Exploding Whale story, and got Barry's column pulled from Clarinet, no need for alarm. The rest of the book (or most of the rest of the book) is as funny as you could want. (Interestingly, neither of the two excerpts from the book that I've seen in magazines mentions chapter twelve.) From a history of computing, through how computers work, via buying a computer, digressing to visit Comdex, to the Internet, Barry zeros in on the ridiculous in technology. And he understands it. Unlike the vast majority of self-proclaimed technopeasants (why is it only in computers and math that people are actually *proud* of their ignorance?) who attempt to joke about the absurdities of computer use, Barry actually knows why a 486 with *only* 8 megs of RAM is funny. (The cover picture? With Dave peering out of the monitor at you? With his hand reaching out of the monitor to press the "P" key? The monitor is obviously powered on. Now I know it's silly and all, but I can't help but wondering ... what would happen if you punched it off? Reading one of Dave Barry's books can do that to you ...) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKDBRYCB.RVW 970128 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse Please note the Peterson story - http://www.netmind.com/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ Subject: AG's Want Tougher Pay-Per-Call Rules Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 23:10:18 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Attorneys general want tougher rules on pay-per-call services WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Federal Trade Commission was urged Monday to impose tougher disclosure laws on pay-per-call services that lure consumers into placing telephone calls to numbers similar to 1-900 lines. Twenty-nine state attorneys general urged the FTC to look into the problem after getting numerous complaints, many from people replying to classified job advertisements. In the ads, people were encouraged to call a 1-800 number or another number with a recognizable area code. They were then encouraged by a recording to dial another number for further information. In many of the cases, the number was a 1-809 number in the Caribbean that charged callers rates similar to 1-900 phone lines. None of the callers was warned of the charges before the calls were made. Another ploy used by the pay-per-call services was to leave the second number on answering machines, the attorneys general said. "Most consumers know that they face special charges for calls to 900 numbers," said Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal. "But the pay-per-call services have expanded to international numbers, toll-free numbers and other avenues that have left many consumers with no disclosure, large telephone bills and little recourse." The attorneys general want the FTC to require disclosure of pay-per-call charges when advertisements solicit calls to a pay-per-call number, including international numbers. In addition to Connecticut, the other states involved in the effort are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 04:47:29 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises > I heard on the radio yesterday that the City of Parma, a suburb of > Cleveland OH, is considering legislation which would require that all > telephones within the municipal boundaries be in the same area code. > Presumably this is in response to the pending split of 216. > Whether municipal government has authority over the topic is another > issue, of course. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as > bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying > that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture > of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] There is similar legislation pending in NJ. I move that we have all three states declared a "legislator brain-free zone" ... John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 http://www.lincs.net/ The latest compiled area code information is available from us! NPAs, NXXs, Dates, all at http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 14:09:41 +0100 From: Steven Colins Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as > bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying > that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture > of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] Pathetic? I don't think so -- it is just the wish of a city to have a unifying area code, to give the place some "identity". Afeter all, someone has to top this proliferation of area codes ... or the term will simply lose it's meaning. ------------------------------ From: K.M. Peterson Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 16:17:03 -0400 Organization: WI/MIT Sequencing Center for Genome Research > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as > bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying > that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture > of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] Not "as bad" ... simply "as useful". K. M. Peterson voice: +1 617 258 0927 Whitehead Institute/MIT Sequencing Center for Genome Research 320 Charles Street - Cambridge, MA 02141-2023 fax: +1 617 258 0903 ------------------------------ From: stud@hockey.net (Mark Steiger) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: 12 May 1997 22:46:19 -0500 Organization: Hockey Net Internet Services rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) writes: > I heard on the radio yesterday that the City of Parma, a suburb of > Cleveland OH, is considering legislation which would require that all > telephones within the municipal boundaries be in the same area code. > Presumably this is in response to the pending split of 216. They are asking to be split trying to pass something like this ... and it won't be via a street, it'll be via some wierd line through the middle of a housing development. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as > bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying > that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture > of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] In Iowa City, IA they did that too. There are little signs all over the city that have a nuclear bomb mushroom cloud with a circle around it and a line through it. Rather funny, yet pathetic. Mark ------------------------------ From: kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com.nospam (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: 13 May 1997 22:07:59 -0400 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. In article , Jeffrey Rhodes wrote: > I thought the FCC's rationale was clear. Access charges for long > distance calls are a means by which these carriers can contribute to > the cost of providing "Universal Service". This subsidy means that the > cost of a residential line does not reflect the real cost of > installing any line. (Even though the ISP community likes to use the > argument that the "profit" of installing a second line to access the > Internet, never mind that these lines will in effect not increase long > distance usage, should provide the telcos with the additional income > to buildout interoffice facilities to the ISPs). As usual the FCC's rationale was anything BUT clear. The Telco's make more than enough money in order to provide universal service than you've been lead to believe. > So the FCC has lowered long distance access charges but wants to > keep the monthly line cost low, so that everyone can continue to > afford Universal Service. Additional residential lines are not > providing Universal Service, so the new line charge is to better > reflect the cost of these additional lines and to offset the > decrease in long distance access revenue to subsidize primary > lines. > It's not easy to be the FCC. I have a second line in my home that I use as a second voice line and as a modem line. Why should I have to pay more for it? In essence I'm being penalized for having the additional line. In my not so humble opinion the FCC should be abolished. The only thing that needs regulation is RF spectrum, not wired communications. Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com Boston has the combat zone, Providence *IS* an erogenous zone. ------------------------------ From: asampson@bellsouth.net (A.T.Sampson) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 23:33:31 GMT Reply-To: asampson@bellsouth.net Here in Atlanta, BellSouth will question you until eternity if you try to put a second line in an address that has existing service under a different name. They made my roomate get a notarized letter from our leasing office stating that we both lived there before they would turn up his phone line in the apartment! As for using a second (or third, or fourth) person's name, I'm not sure how that will work. If your name (and SSN) are on file for 1 line, and (pretending that you managed to get past the interrogation about multiple lines in the same residence) your wife's name and SSN are on the second line -- what happens if you need a third? Use little Bobby's name and SSN? Probably a non-issue for most, but I have to wonder because I have three analog lines and an ISDN line here. So, (at least in BellSouth land) the question becomes -> what happens if this FCC ruling is interpreted to mean "first line at one physical address"? Just something I was thinking about ... Cheers, A.T.Sampson asampson@bellsouth.net ------------------------------ From: ldaffner@rsn.hp.com (Larry Daffner) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: 13 May 1997 16:46:09 GMT Organization: Hewlett Packard - Convex Division, Richardson, TX USA In article , robertd672@aol.com (RobertD672) writes: > Second, I am sure that the phone companies would be very happy if > everyone (excluding of course business customers) were to cancel > service for more than one line. It would prevent them from having to > spend money to upgrade equipment and capacity to handle the explosion > in phone service. At any rate the money will be recouped mainly from > multi-line business customers. I think you missed the boat on this one. I know SWBell has been HEAVILY promoting second lines for both teenagers and computer users here in Dallas, and have heard of several other Baby Bells doing the same thing. (At the same time complaining that they're suffering because everyone's doing #2). I believe, based on their actions, that a second phone line is a pretty 'gravy' proposition for them, and that the whining is just a combination diversionary tactic and built-in excuse. I very much doubt any of them would be "happy" if all those additional residential lines went away. Larry Daffner - Software Engineer | email: ldaffner@rsn.hp.com | HP Convex Technology Center | "I believe every human has a finite number of heartbeats. I don't intend to waste any of mine running around doing exercises." --Neil Armstrong ------------------------------ From: AntiSpam2091744@mcimail.com Subject: Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users Date: 13 May 1997 21:03:15 GMT Organization: Aqua Knights of Atlantis The "hick town" that I live in is part of a state-wide phone co-op. We currently have a digital switch, can get internet from the Phone Co., and they offer ISDN. My last non-subsidized phone bill was $17 for 1 month. from http://www.netins.net/itcweb/ Iowa is unique - 133 independent telephone companies throughout the state are connected to a privately-owned and operated 1400-mile state-of-the-art fiber optic network. In 1986, these companies pooled their resources and formed the world's first centralized equal access network. With this network, and their own digital switches and local networks, these rural companies provide world-class telecommunications services to their customers, equal or superior to the services available in large metro areas. Together, these companies represent the most advanced rural telecommunications network in the United States. Each of the independents is very community oriented and works to promote and develop education and business within their communities. TELEPHONE COMPANY AND SERVICES: Springville Co-op Telephone has a digital switch. We have 1180 access lines in service. We have SS7 switching and can provide voice mail, Internet, paging, 800 service and much more. We also have cable TV service to the town, to Whittier, Viola, Paralta and the trailer court. We have approximately 560 cable TV customers. Springville Co-op Telephone is a shareholder in Iowa Network Services. We provide one stop shopping. Jeff Colbert Bradley Ward Allen wrote in article ... > Those hick towns with 500 people and their own mom-and-pop telephone > company: how much would it cost for their telephone service if it > wasn't subsidized at all? (Even if the local big company wanted to > charge really high rates for interconnection, it could be beat by a > consortium of local mom-and-pops connecting via microwave directly and > relaying to a final larger company with a better interconnection cost > agreement. Redundancy and capacity would be increased, costs kept > reasonable via both companies.) > Is the rural costing argument mostly a big lie in order to use it as > any good ol' excuse to keep rates higher? ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users Date: 12 May 1997 15:20:58 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , Bradley Ward Allen wrote: > ..... Break $6,000 into the life of the equipment, say three years, > and suddenly you have $166.00 per month. That's less than I pay for > my local phone service, and well worth the cost. > .... Solid state equipment in rough terrain can last about a > decade, right? Or am I way off in this estimate? That would make the > cost about $50/month, right out of a modern day urban persons' phone > bill. I'm not sure you've accounted for all the costs of phone service in these numbers -- the local loop traditionally accounts for about 35% of total TELCo costs. And extrapolating your monthly bill into "typical urban bill" is just guessing at the real average monthly bill. My "suburban" monthly bill is about $23/month, even with 2 teenagers and unit charges on every phone call -- I'd really dislike paying double that amount. Guess I'm not very modern. :) Just to give you some data points -- average RBOC REVENUE in 1989 for local service (not Toll and not Access charges and not the monthly FCC charge) was $24/line/month. That includes business and residence lines. Unless you have alternatives to switching, maintenance and trunking between switches, you have to provide a local loop for about $11.90/month (the 35% number above + FCC line charge) to even meet the RBOC number basic income. Some portion of Access revenue (about $13.25 per line/month) should be allotted to the local loop, but even allotting all of it will yield only $25.15/line/month. Non-RBOC TELCos have a loop REVENUE of about $10.40/line/month, less than the RBOCs because they have higher Toll and Access Charge fees. With Access charges allotted to the local loop, their REVENUE becomes about $27.50/month/line. Note that this is REVENUE, not cost. I don't have any useful cost figures that are newer than 1970. But it's pretty clear that any loop substitute has to be in the $20-30/month range to compete with current loop technologies. If you can bundle cable TV or Internet service into the loop, you could probably add another $10/month. One final point -- even though we don't know COST of the local loop, we can determine an upper bound by assuming all revenues are paying for the local loop. Average 1989 RBOC revenue was $48.80/month/line, including all taxes, profits, local, payphone, Access and Toll services. So the local loop MUST cost less than $48.80/month/line -- on average. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 07:18:47 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The newspapers here reported last > week that a family in Ohio had a phone number very similar to Papa > Don's Pizza. They were getting a lot of wrong number calls to order > pizza, so they put an answering machine on their line identifying > themselves as Papa John's Pizza and ising the caller that the Board > of Health had closed them down. The recording further suggested > ordering from Pizza Hut or Dominoes. The real Papa Don's sued them on > account of it and a judge ordered the family to change the message on > their answering machine. > Regards the woman getting phone calls for the hotel, admittedly the > hotel should not have been rude to her about it, but at the same time > I wonder what she expected *them* to do about it. Ignorance, they say, > is bliss, and a lot of Americans are very happy people. By taking > reservations, she was defrauding the hotel. PAT] Best Bet: A message on the machine that says 'we are not permitted to sell pizza from this location due to lack of permission from the Health Board.' or 'Pizza is not available from this location, you may wish to call Dominos or Pizza Hut.' Both messages are true. As long as they made no attempt to identify themselves as 'Papa' they should be ok. After all, the health board in my city won't let me run a pizza joint out of my apartment. My lease also prohibits me from renting out space, so I could also say 'I can't rent you a room, perhaps you may want to call (insert name of competing hotel)?' BTW: Pat, Was the difference between 'Papa Don's' and 'Papa John's' intentional or was one a typo? We have Papa John's here (with most having phone numbers ending -7272 and some advertising this as -papa). James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Telecom Indiana Webpage http://www.iquest.net/~bellaire/telecom/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually I got the two reversed. They have a 'Papa John' in their town with a similar phone number, so they put 'Papa Don' on their recording intending to make it sound the same to anyone not listening closely. I mentioned here a few years ago about the fight between the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Chicago and the Hotel Regency about three blocks away. It seems this really dreadful flophouse catering mostly to prostitutes and their customers by the hour on East Ohio Street in downtown Chicago was named Hotel Regency. They legitimatly had the right to the name, having opened back in the 1920's, as a house of ill-repute even back then. Along comes the Hyatt organization back in the late sixties or early seventies and builds the really nice Hyatt Regency Hotel just a few blocks away in the Gold Coast area on North Michigan Avenue. The resulting confusion by business travelers proved to be a bonanza for the flophouse. In a telephone directory, *Hotel* Regency would be listed ahead of *Hyatt* Regency. An out of town caller asking directory assistance for 'The Regency Hotel' would as often as not be given the number to the switchboard at the flophouse, 312-SUPerior-7-4900. When the flophouse management got the drift of what was going on, they thought of a way to make it work even better: They added a listing in the phone book entitled 'Hotel Regency Reservations Department' with their phone number. Now out of town callers as often as not when asking for 'The Regency Hotel, it is located in downtown Chicago somewhere ...' quite frequently would get a directory assistance operator trying to be helpful who would spot the 'reservations department' and ask the caller if they wanted 'the number for reservations' ... of course that is what the caller wanted and the operator would innocently give out the flophouse number, 312-787-4900. The switchboard and the desk clerks at the flophouse were alerted to this and when a call came in from some secretary somewhere seeking to make a reservation for her boss, the flophouse people would cheerfully make the reservation, and guarentee it with a charge to a credit card of course. To assure that no fraud took place, they did give their correct address to the caller, and they did in fact 'reserve a room'. They also sent a written confirmation on rather elegant looking business stationary back to the caller. When the business executive arrived in town, one of two things would happen. If he got in a cab and said 'take me to the Regency in downtown Chicago' the cab driver by default took him to Hyatt Regency where the businessman would go in and discover he had no reservation. If he gave the actual street address to the cab driver per the letter he had recieved, he wound up at the right place, or maybe the wrong place depending on how you look at it. Surely this must be a mistake the businessman would complain to the cab driver ... no, says the driver, it is 19 East Ohio Street. After some discussion they would find their way to the Hyatt Regency where once again the businessman would discover he had no reservation. Many, many people complained to the 'wrong place' and demanded their money back. The Hotel Regency legitimatly claimed that a room had been reserved and held aside all night. If you have problems, maybe you should ask the Directory Assistance people to give you your money back. All we did was answer the phone, in good faith take your reservation, and put aside a room as you requested ... . One secretary for a large corporation had booked *seventy-five* rooms for the company's sales staff which was flying in from all over the country for a seminar. She had mailed a check for several thousand dollars as requested for an advance deposit, made payable as the flophouse requested to 'Hotel Regency' ... The flophouse has about three hundred rooms (nineteen story building) and the requested rooms were left vacant; they were no dummies and did not intend to get sued ... Well, they finally did get sued, and won. The real Hyatt Regency at first thought it would be easy to win a suit claiming that the flophouse had appropriated their name and was deliberatly stealing their business. Then they discovered someone on their staff had not done their homework; *they* were the ones illegitimatly using the name 'Regency' despite the fact that they knew exactly what the flophouse people were doing, taking advantage of out of town people confused by the similarity of names, and adding a 'reservations department' listing in the phone directory to add to the confusion knowing that directory assistance would give it out as 'the number to call for reservations at the Regency in downtown Chicago'. The Court agreed that it would be quite easy for confusion to result, but noted that not a single fraudulent act had occurred. The flophouse people *never* claimed to be Hyatt Regency; never opened mail which was addressed to Hyatt Regency (even if sent to the flophouse address); never cashed checks payable to Hyatt Regency ... and still the number of people who made reservations and paid for them in advance with Hotel Regency caused some tremendous grief ... and I expect at least a few secretaries to get fired. The flophouse people flatly refused to refund any of it and fought the credit card companies who issued chargebacks as a result of customer complaints. They won those also. Their official response was that 'it is a matter of personal taste as to whether our accomodations are better or worse or equal to those of the Hyatt Regency; many of the persons who guarenteed payment for a room did not even show up at our door or call to cancel; therefore we did our part and no refund is possible.' Finally the Hyatt organization settled with the Hotel Regency by offering to purchase the name. The terms of the deal was that Hotel Regency had to change its name as soon as possible. For the duration of the current issue of the phone directory, they would refer calls to the correct place as soon as they detirmined the call was not for them (they agreed to cease taking reservations for themselves or to at least clarify *which* place was intended by the caller and that should have been obvious); they agreed to answer their switchboard by number rather than by name for about two months during the transition period ("good evening, seven eight seven, four nine hundred"), and they would open mail addressed to Hotel Regency and promptly forward anything which 'obviously' was not intended for themselves such as mail for reservations. The Hotel Regency became the Tokyo Hotel as of a certain date and over a period of a few months following screened the mail addressed to Hotel Regency and forwarded quite a bit to the Hyatt Regency along with referring callers to the correct phone number. The new phone book came out about sixth months later and that pretty much was the end of it, although directory assistance had quit giving the wrong number as of the time the name changed. They refused to give up their phone number however -- Hyatt had offered to purchase that also -- stating they had a number of permanent residents who would be inconvenienced as would the flophouse management itself. The Hyatt organization paid dearly; it was in the five-digit price range, and this occurred over twenty years ago, in 1975-76. The Tokyo Hotel is still at the same address today, still with 787-4900, and probably still renting rooms by the night to the same kind of people. Ameritech directory assistance no longer gets the two confused, 'Tokyo' being quite a distance away in the listings. PAT] ------------------------------ From: asherman@lehman.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway Date: 13 May 1997 09:52:35 -0400 Organization: Lehman Brothers, Inc. In article , Tony Toews wrote: > Reminds of the story I heard, likely in this newsgroup, about the > woman whose phone number she'd had for many years was similar to a > brand new large hotel. She'd get many mis-dialed calls for the hotel. > She tried talking to someone at the hotel but get a rude reception. > She then started confirming all the room reservations she got. Then > the front desk had to deal with all the angry customers who had no > reservations. They got a very bad reputation. To which PAT replied: > Regards the woman getting phone calls for the > hotel, admittedly the hotel should not have been rude to her about > it, but at the same time I wonder what she expected *them* to do > about it. Ignorance, they say, is bliss, and a lot of Americans are > very happy people. By taking reservations, she was defrauding the > hotel. PAT] As I recall, the "woman" was John Higdon, and what the hotel did was publish *John's* 800 number in their national advertising. When informed of the problem, they refused to give John any relief, like followup ads correcting the error, or anything like that. They tried to insist that John change his number, although he had it first, because they were bigger. That's when he decided to say yes to all requests on his 800 line. On one hand, you have Pat's argument that the hotel was being defrauded. On the other hand, the hotel was causing economic damage (800 calls *are* reverse billed) and refusing to accept responsibility for their own negligence. Now what would happen in a court of law, I don't know, but the court of Digest public opinion has published 800 numbers for lesser offenses. :^) John, did I remember the story right? Andy Sherman 3 World Financial Center, NYC, 11th Flr Manager, Business Continuity (212) 526-4641 Lehman Brothers Global Unix Support asherman@lehman.com "Never use a scalpel if a machete will do the job." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now if the party receiving the phone calls had used the same approach as Jim Bellaire suggested i.e. 'we can no longer accept reservations or rent rooms at this location; the Fire Department and Building Inspectors will not allow it. You might want to call (other hotel) where the property has been certified to be in safe and habitable condition ...' ... then there would be no fraud. Just do not claim to be who you are not -- never make any false claims; never make any promises you cannot keep such as reserving a room; never open mail or cash checks not in your name. Yeah, maybe John Higdon will bring us up to date on that case. At least thirty years ago, I had a phone number which was given out in error on a published list of janitor/caretakers for various apartment buildings belonging to one real estate company. My calls to the management office asking for the list to be corrected were ignored and it was only a simple typewritten, mimeographed list. I only got it corrected once I started giving the tenants a hard time who were calling for maintainence work, i.e. 'at the rent you are paying, we do not provide heat or hot water'; 'if you want the garbage in the hallway cleaned up, then do it yourself'; or sometimes a much more simple and direct, 'fu** off, I do not plan to do any more repairs or cleaning where you live.' PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 18:15:44 -0400 From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Info Superhighway In article , ttoews@telusplanet.net (Tony Toews) writes: > She tried talking to someone at the hotel but get a rude reception. > She then started confirming all the room reservations she got. Then > the front desk had to deal with all the angry customers who had no > reservations. They got a very bad reputation. I have seen all variations. When I was a kid, we moved to a new apartment, and the number we had used to belong to a scrap dealer of the kind that makes a point of NOT asking any questions about the source of the "scrap". As he had been shut down, the number had been recycled, to us (i.e., technically, my dad). A few years later our neighbor and friend a few blocks away had their phone number published in an ad for a department store with a special offer. The printers had garbeled one digit. The phone co rerouted the number to an operator that gave out the right number, but it took my mother many tries to get the operator's attention and explain that she really wanted to talk to the private family, upon which she was finally given a temporary number assigned to our hapless friend. Some years later we moved. By then, there were two Dr. Xxxx Andersson in the Stockholm phone book, the other one being a shrink (my dad is has a PhD in papermaking). Some distraught calls starting to pour in. In the last ten years, my wife and I (in California now) first had a phone line one digit off from the local Holiday Inn (as above). We later changed the number, as we wanted it private, and got a number that had previously belonged to a family hyperactive in chuch grouups. We still get calls for them five years later! Last year, I started a new job (described long ago in this ng) where my number is 805-xxx-yyyy Extension zzzz. I gave this number out to a bunch of people, and some of them (I never figured out who) took upon themselves to save the step of going through the operator by dialling 805-xxx-zzzz. Trouble is, the company is neither DiD nor Centrex, and the xxx-zzzz goes to a private family, who started to call the Company switchboard and complaining about me! They had some of my sympathy, being called by a fax machine repeatedly at 5 am is not fun, but I had very limited control over it. Thus I know all about roadkill, and it does not take high tech or infosuperhighways, just a phone line. Regards, Nils Andersson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You have to divide things into groups. The companies, government institutions, etc who carelessly give out wrong numbers and then refuse to do anything about it (or are so bureaucratic that the message never gets to the right person) deserve to be banged very hard -- without committing fraud in the process of course. In cases where the business is not at fault and simply has such a volume of calls that a certain percentage of the public is going to reach you in error, then have fun with the callers if you want. A long time ago I used to have the business phone number 312-WEbster-9-4600. The Sears Roebuck credit card office at their store in downtown Chicago had WABash-2-4600, in the form of a four or five position cordboard which rocked around the clock; thousands of calls daily. So telco decides to cut a crossbar CO over to ESS; somebody screwed up the translations and made 922 come out 939. The day of the cut and for two days following my single line phone rang constantly with people looking for Sears. Take a call, tell them wrong number and hang up; the phone would ring again instantly with another caller looking for Sears. I doubt Sears even missed the calls based on their call volume. I had to call telco three or four times over two days before they finally decided I was not some crank caller and listened to me. I really had fun with that one, telling customers their credit was cancelled because 'they complain too much' or were 'getting to old to be trusted with any more credit' or sometimes I would give them an extra thousand dollars (in 1975 money) on their credit line. I know, I know ... I contradict my own advice -- never commit fraud ... it was fun though! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #119 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 15 23:57:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA01493; Thu, 15 May 1997 23:57:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 23:57:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705160357.XAA01493@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #120 TELECOM Digest Thu, 15 May 97 23:57:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 120 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: The "Call Director" Telephone Set? (Richard Taylor) Re: GSM SIMS and Crypto (Peter Morgan) Audio Monitoring When Phone is On Hook (S Hemphill) 1997 Canadian Telecom Management Update (Ian Angus) ICB News Update (Judith Oppenheimer) ANI Used to Track Stolen Laptops (oldbear@arctos.com) Network Switching (Simon Edgett) Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet (Tel-One Network Services) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (jfmezei) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (George Gilder) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Dana Paxson) Re: Western Union = 4321 (wlevant@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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Richard Taylor Subject: Re: The "Call Director" Telephone Set? Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 01:57:12 +0100 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Lee Winson wrote: > In the 1960s, the Bell System introduced a "Call Director" telephone > set, which was a key telephone set, but with many buttons. The > handset was on the side, there was a dial (or keypad), then vertical > rows of buttons. > I was wondering: Were there any special features in a Call Director > system that were not available in the six-button key sets? If so, > could someone describe some of the features? > Or, was a Call Director merely a keyset with more buttons to handle more > lines? As a telephone technician for the Air Force in 1969-72, I used to install, repair and reconfigure key equipment, including 30 button Call Directors. They had 100 pair cables with 5 Amphenol fingers (20 pair per finger), and were a bitch to terminate and cross connect. But basically, except for a common Hold button, they were just like 5 six-button 2564 or 564 sets wired together. Each line had a Tip and Ring, an "A" control lead (part of A and A1) and a LG and L for lamp (Basically 3 pair per line). In the military, the first row or two were dial lines, then on the next 3 rows, each command post had a hot line to other command posts on base or across country. The 1A2 system had special line cards for dial line, ring down or DC tie line. You could make some keys non-locking for signaling buzzers, and you could even take the "dogs" (detents) out of the keys to make the buttons non-locking for a mechanical cheap conference arrangement. With Call Directors and 1A2, you could do just about anything. Some sets had speakerphones built-in or adjunct. I've still got some 100 pair "tails" I pulled out of some abandoned offices in the late 80s when I worked Interconect. Almost totally obsolete now, but great reliable technology when it existed. That Western Electric gear was top notch. There were a lot of tricks I could do with a 30-button set and 1A2 that you still can't do with Electronic Key Systems. Of course, there's much more an EKTS can do (like memory and programming) that 1A2 could never do. Richard Taylor Carrboro, NC ------------------------------ From: Peter Morgan Subject: Re: GSM SIMS and Crypto Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 06:31:40 +0100 In message Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote: > terms. e.g. we all know about sim portability - use on any phone. but > you can also protect your phone from being stolen by locking it to > your sim - so it won't work with another card. In some cases, it could be used by the carrier to lock you into their network ... the phone cannot be used with another SIM card and they will charge you a fee for unlocking your phone. This may be peculiar to the UK, where even the latest digital phones are often available for free, or for a low sum of cash, and with some networks even the connect fee (often US$45) is also waived. The network I use has a one year minimum contract, but the charges are quite low -- first three months cost me US$90 plus US$50 connect fee, and further 9 months I have changed to a lower cost tariff -- just US$25/month so the network may not break even if I get a new number and new phone when my 12 months are up :-) It may be interesting to see if the old phone will accept the new SIM, as both phones will be tied to the same network. For comparison purposes: For the first three months, I had 60 minutes of included airtime, while the lower tariff gives 15 minutes/month only. [An option is to have a second number available on the same phone, with a monthly rental of US$9, but giving 60 minutes "chat" time in off-peak hours (ie outside M-F 07:00-19:00)] Peter Morgan, North Wales, UK. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 16:54:22 -0700 From: S Hemphill Subject: Audio Monitoring When Phone is On Hook Question: A tech at my place of employment (a west coast silicone wafer fabrication facility) says he was appoached by a telemarketer in the mid 1980's who offered a security service. According to the marketer, the 'security' company worked in conjunction with the phone company and they were able to provide audio monitoring of your home/business through your telephones with no additional equipment. They simply, with your permission, activated a switch at the telephone co., and they were able to hear inside your home through your phones even though they were ON HOOK! What I want to know is, can this actually be done??? Can my home be invaded through phones that are HUNG UP? Thanks in advance for any assistance, S Hemphill hemphill@worldaccessnet.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it can, but not without some re-wiring of the phone itself. It is not just a simple matter of 'activating a switch at the telephone company'. The handset on the phone needs to be wired a little differently on the 'network' or internal connections area of the phone. You need to make the handset bypass the switchook while having the switchook continue to open and close the phone line (leaving the handset alive at all times). Then, add a capacitor of a certain value in parallel to the pair, shunting the capacitor in and out of the line based on the condition of the switchook. The capacitor tricks the central office in the way it would normally respond. I suppose they could shunt the capacitor in and out of line via 'a switch at the telephone company'. It is quite similar to the way a phone is tapped. Go find your neighbor's pair at some nearby point where the cable is multipled. Take a spare pair under your control and tie it on to his pair. Now at your (distant) end attach the pair to a amplified speaker of some kind. You say that will keep his line 'off hook' ... but you add a capacitor (or maybe it is a resistor ... grin) in parallel across your pirate pair at some point in the line and that prevents the central office from 'seeing' you out there; or him seeing you either. Now whenever someone dials your neighbor your little speaker will come to life and you will hear the same ringing signal that the caller is hearing. You will hear him talking anytime he goes off hook. Run the output into a tape recorder if you want, particularly if you'd enjoy going to prison for a few years. I'll let you do the math on the resistor (or was it a capacitor?) values required. You need to diddle the voltage in the line when the phone is on hook so that the central office does not notice the intrusion. If you get in his house and rewire his handset as described above -- although I admit I am being skimpy in my documentation -- then you will hear him all the time. When he goes off hook you'll hear his phone conversations; when he is on hook you'll hear him doing whatever he is doing otherwise. It is a dirty, sleazy business, that wiretapping and monitoring, but someone has to do it ... why not you? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ian Angus Subject: 1997 Canadian Telecom Management Update Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 09:56:17 -0400 Organization: Angus TeleManagement Group 1997 TELECOM MANAGEMENT UPDATE An intensive briefing on today's revolution in Canadian business telecommunications. ** Vancouver: June 2 ** Calgary: June 3 ** Toronto: June 11 ** Ottawa: June 16 ** Montreal: June 17 On May 1, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) announced sweeping changes, designed to allow competition in local telephone service and cable television across Canada. For seventeen years, Angus TeleManagement's Update briefings have set the standards for focused, action-oriented information, specifically designed to meet the needs of Canadian telecom professionals. So of course this year's Update will include full details and analysis of the impact of the CRTC's latest local competition decisions, as well as the state of long distance competition, technology trends, convergence, the impact of the Internet and new wireless services, and much more. Full details on the 1997 briefing available on the Web at: http://www/educatn/ed-mu.html To request a brochure, or to register, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 500. ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: ICB News Update Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 07:37:26 -0400 Organization: ICB Toll Free News Reply-To: joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com May 7, 1997 ICB TOLL FREE NEWS - http://www.icbtollfree.com New Report - TOLL FREE CELLULAR Borne of regulatory loophole -- and welcomed by cellular carriers -- TollFree Cellular and its telco partners will perhaps escape the greedy clutches of the FCC control patrol, currently wreaking havoc in the wireline toll-free marketplace. New Service - ICB BOOK STORE ICB is proud to announce that, in affiliation with Book Stacks Unlimited, we are now offering an extensive library of telecommunications, marketing, and other business books for purchase via the Internet. Plus more new articles, links and sponsors. ICB TOLL FREE NEWS - http://www.icbtollfree.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 08:16:24 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: ANI Used to Track Stolen Laptops This, as sumarized in Educom's online newsletter "Edupage" ... LAPTOP THEFT IS RAMPANT Last year, a record 265,000 laptop computers worth $804.8 million were stolen in the United States, according to SafeWare, a computer insurance firm. That number is up 27% from 1995. To combat the theft, companies are turning to asset management software, which records computer serial numbers, the employee assigned to the machine and other information, or theft software such as CompuTrace, made by Absolute. CompuTrace works by installing a hidden software program that automatically dials Absolute's headquarters every two weeks. The call is then traced by AT&T Canada and the phone number is cross-checked with the owner's file. If the number doesn't match up, the laptop is told to call the center again in five minutes. By tracing the phone call every five minutes, police can pinpoint the laptop's location. U.S. officials point out that CompuTrace couldn't be used in the United States, where companies are not allowed to use AT&T's automatic number identification information to sell services to a customer. [sumarized from: Investor's Business Daily, May 5, 1997] ------------------------------ From: Simon Edgett Subject: Network Switching Date: 15 May 1997 19:19:21 GMT Organization: grouptelecom Reply-To: Simon Edgett The number of T1's etc in this scenario are actually larger but I'll simplify ... We have a customer that currently brings in 2 T1's for inbound 800 trunking and 2 t1's inbound direct dial. All inbound calls are classified by ANI information and the callers responses to an IVR system. Currently answer supervision is returned by the IVR system. The problem comes from the fact the after the IVR questions (about 3min) 30%-50% of the traffic is deemed to be "outsourceable". This calls are then re-routed through a free outbound trunk to an out sourcing partner. This is fine for the direct dial customers. The problem arises when an 800 caller calls, the gets outsourced. For the duration of the call the call centre ends up paying for two trunks plus double the LD. Assuming the outsource partner and the call center use the same LD and trunk provider for the inbound circuits, is there an easy way to do network level switching to actually re-route the call at the network level to the outsource company. Current plans are to use AT&T US. Comments? Simon Edgett | grouptelecom Manager, Operations | 1000 - 701 West Georgia Street 604-688-3010 fax 688-3011 | PO Box 10143, Pacific Centre sedgett@gt.ca http://www.gt.ca/ | Vancouver, B.C., Canada V7Y 1C6 ------------------------------ From: telone@shout.net (Tel-One Network Services) Subject: Re: Rural Telcos and the Internet Date: 15 May 1997 15:17:21 GMT Organization: Shouting Ground Technologies, Inc. Well, there are *scams* going on, of course ... a company will come to an ISP and ask for a set fee per user using an "all you can use (800) access number" on a per subscriber basis. They load the (800) onto an underlying carrier and let the carrier take the loss when the original facilitator takes off. If unlimited use of an (800) number is 19.95 per month, why isn't regular long distance? nwdirect@netcom.com wrote: > Stanley Cline (roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com) wrote: >> Re: (rural Internet access) > There are now several ISPs that provide flat-rate, unlimited access > service for around $19.95 via an 800 number. There is now no reason > why everyone with a U.S. phone cannot have reasonably priced access. ------------------------------ From: jfmezei Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 19:16:30 -0500 Organization: SPC Reply-To: "[nospam]jfmezei"@videotron.ca John R. Covert wrote: > Pocket Communications, and (in Canada) Microcell/Fido. Customers of > Omnipoint (and eventually the others) will be able to roam all over > the world simply by taking their SIM card out of their 1900 MHz phone > and inserting it into a 900 MHz or 1800 MHz phone. This was the convincing argument to me, avoid the proprietary USA protocol and choose a carrier that has GSM in North America to allow worldwide roaming with the SIM card. HOWEVER, since current North American GSM offerings have telephones that are not compatible to the rest of the world with only the SIM card transferable, one must still deal with a telephone set rental when going overseas. This is especially troublesome if your home telephone uses a full SIM card, but the ones you rent require that you have the "cut up" SIM card (about 1.5cm * 1.5cm instead of the credit-card size). Of course, dual frequency phones will solve the roaming problem. Furthermore, one must question how much it costs to rent a telephone without service vs renting one with a local service package. Not all rental shops at airports may be willing to rent you a telephone without a sim card (service). Perhaps this will change, or perhaps this is only isolated cases in certain countries. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 20:56:25 -0400 From: George Gilder Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study I was simply pointing out that your original cell phone claim (comparing cancers of users to those of nonusers) was based on faulty reasoning. I don't think the reasoning was faulty. It was based on the observation that cellphones, and other similar radiators such as computers, are part of an industrial civilization that enriches its participants and allows them to survive in greater numbers for longer lives. I reject regression analysis that eliminates all the benefits of industrial civilization from the ledger, while enabling some group of litigants to extort potential billions from the cellular phone industry by analogizing radiation to tobacco. There are enough important threats in the world to require brusque dismissal of the trivial. Incidentally, in my original response, I was not making a serious scientific argument. Such arguments against the radiophobes have been patiently rendered for decades, most recently in the case of radon gas, which was found in a vast government survey to be accompanied, with statistical significance, by a reduction in cancer rates. This result -- the more radon the less cancer -- suggests hormesis. I do not claim that hormesis accounts for the longevity of humans in industrial civilization. I was merely suggesting that the contrary view of radiation, based on studies of irradiated mice, was pretty silly in the case of humans who have steadily increased their lifespans through the centuries bathed in ultraviolet sunlight, while living in a planetary magnetic field of half a gauss, charged by lightning strikes a hundred times a second to a capacitive level of 100 volts per meter of height, all the while spending an average of seven hours a day couched in front of a CRT. All the natural sources of radiation dwarf the millionths of gauss involved in cellphones. I was trying to laugh the charges out of the house. I guess it didn't work. I apologize for implying that my correspondents are part of a radiophobic conspiracy. I don't believe that. But I am afraid -- and I truly believe this -- that in the current litigious climate it is a mistake even to entertain the radiophobic claims. If I did, for example, I could guarantee myself a good living testifying against telecom and computer companies. But I -- and all of you -- have far better things to do. George Gilder ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 19:11:01 -0700 From: Dana Paxson Reply-To: dwpaxson@servtech.com Organization: Dana Paxson Studio Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study This is a subject and a statistic to which I like to apply the 'struck by lightning' test: Am I more likely to be killed, maimed, made ill or retarded, and so forth, by the threat in question, than I am to be killed by a bolt of lightning? If not, why in the world should I care? To the threat of cellphone cancer, I say: Get in line behind strokes, drunk drivers, escaped serial killers, undiscovered serial killers, prostate cancers, Alzheimer's disease, choking on Brazil nuts, rogue cop on a rampage, mad bombers, flesh-eating bacteria, the next great plague, comets striking Earth, militant gun nuts, second-hand smoke, AIDS, suicidal depressions, cleaning pistols, arson, poison-gas spills, pets turned feral, misprescribed drugs, nosocomial fatality, iatrogenic diseases, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, muggers, bad doctors, bad psychiatrists, wilful stupidity, falling down a flight of stairs, falling down on the floor, falling out of bed, falling off a building, coffee burns, hypersensitive allergic reactions, ventricular fibrillation, manure-tank methane, mistranslated directions on a fuel pump, lethal toys, aortic aneurism, rabid squirrels, and oh yes, lightning strikes. I could go on. Want me to? I'm a writer of fiction, among other things, but I can't keep up with reality for bizarre and improbable ways to die that actually happen. Just read the papers. See my point? Dana Paxson ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 23:10:50 EDT Subject: Re: Western Union = 4321 Dear PAT : Thanks for the informative history of Western Union's Chicagoland operations. You mentioned other "regular" numbers, one of which was the telco's business office. Here in Philadelphia, back when I was a kid, telco's business office was always "OFficial 3-0050". They got rid of that some years ago, and gave every office its own POTS number. Now they all have 800 numbers (no wonder we're running out) and OF-3 (633) has been converted to a regular NXX code in a suburb of the city. As a general proposition, Bell of Pennsylvania (now BA) doesn't assign numbers ending in -00XX, and used to reserve some for testing purposes. For example, some NXX-0028 combinations (but not every active NXX) would connect to local repair; useful if you needed to call repair for your home phone from somewhere else. Some NXX-0094 and NXX-0095 combinations would connect to each other (you'd dial one, and wait for someone else to dial the other one to yak ...) By contrast, NJ Bell routinely assigned numbers like NXX-0003 to regular customers. THEIR internal numbers were always NXX-99XX (regular NXX). In the front of the NJ Bell telephone book, the business office was listed with the number "NXX-9950 -- out of area, ask Operator for NXX-Official-50". The coin bureau had another number, maybe NXX-9951. You could get their operators to connect you for free by asking for the "Official" number. There are some exceptions to those assignment policies, though. A law firm in town has the number 215-569-0000. Some time back, Bell tried to reclaim it (said it was supposed to be a "test" number, or some nonsense). The law firm said that it would be glad to give it back, if Bell paid for all of the associated expenses ... needless to say, they still have that number. Those -00XX/-99XX numbers didn't return supervision, and you'd get your dime^h^h^h^h quarter back upon hanging up. I've also noticed, particularly in small towns, that main switchboard numbers tend to end in -XX01 or -XX11, rather than XX00. I always thought that had something to do with how SxS and 5XB offices were wired (it was easier to set up a hunt group from -XX11 to -XX19 [all in a single selector or crossbar relay bank] than from -XX00 to -XX08 [from the bottom of one selector/bank to the top of the next]), but can anyone confirm that? On a related subject, I think that's why hunt groups almost always had numbers in sequence ... otherwise, you'd have jumpers running all over the frame. In fact, at one job I had when I was in college, the phone system was a Bell 757 (which is, I'm told, essentially a crossbar-style CO, in miniature), and we had a bunch of highly arbitrary hunt groups set up, with -- that's right -- jumpers all over portions of the frame. You had to be careful pulling out some of the slides, for fear you'd cut one of the hunt group jumpers. Bill ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #120 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 16 01:10:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA06190; Fri, 16 May 1997 01:10:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 01:10:17 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705160510.BAA06190@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #121 TELECOM Digest Fri, 16 May 97 01:10:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 121 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Stewart Fist) We Have Been Attacked. Reward Offered. Assistance Requested (Jim Youll) Book Review: "The Modem Coach" by Blankenhorn et al (Rob Slade) Book Review: "The Online Deskbook" by Bates (Rob Slade) Automated Attendant Tutorial Now On-Line (Pacific Telephony Design) Network Manager Needed For Large Biotech Company (Michael Jones) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Derek Peschel) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (John B. Hines) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Bill Sohl) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Brett Frankenberger) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (David E. Bernholdt) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (John Stahl) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 16 May 1997 12:18:03 +1000 From: fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study George Gilder writes: > And of course this issue cannot be resolved in the face of a > baffling complex of coincident and correlative factors and > conditions, which can be summed up as industrial civilization > itself with its associated measuring apparatus and vast increases > in longevity. Obviously the new 'measuring apparatus' (the ability to detect cancers earlier) has boosted the figures to a degree, but probably not as much as many people suppose. There does appear to be a general 1% pa increase in the brain cancer rate, for instance, which if it continues to be compounded over my son's 70 year life span, would be more than slightly significant. George also points to the problem of longevity -- we live longer, and therefore get more cancers. While this may certainly be a part-explanation for the increase in incidence, it is also THE PROBLEM. Obviously, since we are living longer, we must pay much more attention today to cumulative environmental-health conditions that would have been ignored a generation ago. The longer people live, the more attention the society must pay to potentially carcinogenic triggers. > We are left with the choice of either overthrowing industrial > civilization with all its overwhelming benefits (the choice of the > radiophobes) or ignoring the latest legal target until conclusive > scientific evidence is available. These aren't the only two choices, as George would have you believe. There is a third choice, which is to: a) adequately test products for safety before they are released into the mass market (this was not done with GSM cellular phones); b) adequately fund independent research to keep watch over drugs, chemicals and devices which could conceivably create major epidemic problems over time; c) legislate to protect citizens who have no way of making these judgments themselves. I've never yet met a radiophobe who wants to overthrow industrial civilization, so I must guess that George is sending up some mad ranting of the lunar right in America. I have, however, met a lot of radiation experts, radio engineers and many, many biomedical scientists who are seriously concerned -- but who's concern is generally limited to the cell-phone handset placed against the side of the head. > If every innovation had to face a prolonged barrage of > speculative challenges, and endless courtroom speelunking for > deep pockets, no innovation -- from the automobile to aspirin-- > could ever have been launched. I've never really thought about computers and communications as belonging to an industry sector where the motivation for innovation had been destroyed by "endless courtroom speelunking" or a "prolonged barrage of spectulative challenges". I've always thought of convergence more in terms of a mad-house where the doors have been left open. I've never seen an industry where so many false claims are openly made, so many products and services are advertised as 'breakthoughs' and then turn out to vapourware; and where so many people get suckered into buying useless products, or products which are superseded within months of purchase. None of this, to my knowledge, is generated by lawyers. Perhaps a bit of restraint by the technical innovators wouldn't be amiss. > Of course, the theory of global warming would have prohibited > the industrial revolution itself. I think George reveals his true biases and motivations here. He sees progress simply in technical terms, and so denies the obvious -- that a lot of what we do in this society is destructive as well as constructive. What we need to learn to do, is to balance the value with the dis-value. Nothing would have "prohibited the industrial revolution" more than minds that were closed to research evidence. > So far the enemies of cellphones have offered absolutely no > evidence of interest except to the usual hypochondriacs with > lawyers and rodents in tow (feeding on a now preposterous > theory of linear human response to radiation). That's George's view. It certainly isn't mine. I can only guess that he refuses to read anything from "radiophobe" scientists - which in his terms means anyone finding evidence contrary to George's certainties. And who says the response is linear -- it could even be exponential!!! Readers can rest assured that we "enemies of the cellphone" and "radiophobes" are not about to take over the world and ban all radio devices. We are very much in the minority, and don't have the multi-million dollar PR and lobby budgets of the cell phone companies. And we are slowly learning to make the distinction between: * handsets and cell towers in terms of power-density; * the obvious emission problems intrinsic in TDMA vs. those of AMPS/CDMA; * the potential difference in likely causation between the ELF and R/F components of TDMA; and * the reliability and importance of totally controlled laboratory research vs. human-statistical epidemiological studies. We may even learn eventually to distinguish mice from men. Stewart Fist, Technical writer and journalist. Current Australian columns: Archives of my columns are available at the Australian and also at the ABC site: Development site: Phone:+612 9416 7458 Fax: +612 9416 4582 Old Homepage: ------------------------------ From: jim@newmediagroup.com (Jim Youll) Subject: We Have Been Attacked. Reward Offered. Assistance Requested. Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 17:59:22 -0400 Organization: Thunderboy Enterprises My domain newmediagroup.com is under attack by someone who doesn't like my MILITANT, PUBLIC ANTI-SPAM stance. To date their actions have included sending apparently several thousand e-mail messages, forged showing my name as the sender. In addition, this same party or someone working with them conducted a denial-of-service attack on our system last night, 5/14. Details will be posted to a website shortly, including system logs clearly showing the terrorists' use of third-party unsecured SMTP servers as relays (which you will also see by looking at the headers of the messages that were sent). Their attack has also included threats of harm against me. PLEASE let people know this did not originate at newmediagroup.com. It is a complete forgery. We are TRYING to investigate and at the moment have a number of backbone carriers, and MCI security, involved. I am doing all I can. PLEASE tell people to stop writing to complain. This did not come from us. We don't spam. I am FIGHTING spam and that is why I was targeted in this manner. When you see their mail-bomb messages to me, you will understand. I am seeking cooperation from the sites which were used as relays. Sheila, apparently an adminstrator at freenet.carleton.ca (office@ is their e-mail address, and if you have received junk that bounced off their mailer, I STRONGLY suggest you contact them and demand the holes be closed). Carleton Freenet has notified me (5/15/97, 1600 EDT by e-mail) that they will not release their SMTP logs, which would show the origin of the message injected into their mailer. A man reached at nevwest.com said he had "one technician working on it" but really didn't understand the specifics, and was not very excited about helping. This is all very exciting for electronic terrorists, I am sure. New Media Group (and I in particular!) do not send or generate commercial e-mail. Ever. We are a small Internet presence provider working closely and on-site with clients in the Midwestern US. Only. We do not seek, service, or advertise to anyone outside that area, and we do not use e-mail for advertising. Copies of all logs and the threatening messages which came here have been forwarded to security officers at all ISPs we could identify, and at the security offices of backbone providers involved in this. We're trying, but it will be difficult to identify who did this. We're trying. I fully intend to press criminal and civil charges at the very moment an indictment becomes feasible. The reason we have been targeted is that I (personally, not this company) have been leading a campaign AGAINST junk e-mail. Please help me find out who did this. I am prepared to file criminal and civil charges at the instant an indictment is feasible. If you look at the headers, you will see that the messages did not come from here. The incoming messages threatened more attacks unless I stop my campaign to free people from unwanted junk e-mail. This is terrorism, plain and simple and I call on the entire Internet community to help track down the responsible parties. I will appreciate any assistance you can provide. See http://www.agentzero.com/junkmail for the information I posted in my fight against junk e-mail. I will shortly post there complete system logs, messages with headers, and everything else that has been sent to authorities. I am offering a reward of $1,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the perpetrators of this crime. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I too have really had all I can handle of this and I am soliciting the assistance of any attorney who wishes to volunteer. Jay Ashworth has pointed out to me in recent correspondence that Spamford and Company are systematically ripping off names and email addresses from mailing lists including this one. Today alone I personally received a dozen pieces of spam; one of which was even alleged to come from this machine with forged headers, etc. This is not going to stop anytime soon I fear, and at this point I want to proceed with litigation. I want to see enforcement of the federal law against sending unsolicited material to facsimile devices. I want to stop the wholesale ripoff of names which appear in this Digest. I am perfectly willing and desirous of being a plaintiff (or one of several plantiffs as the case may be) in any legal action taken against Spamford Wallace, AGIS and similar outfits. The comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup is a total shambles in some places where it became unmoderated -- quite by accident, I am sure -- filled with spam like most other newsgroups. Please, admins, check to make sure c.d.t. is **moderated** at your site. My bots are generally good at recognizing forged approval lines which do not have my md5sum signature, however the author of that script is making some changes and improvements in it. The point is, I have had it. Enough is enough, and I want to see those idiots start getting **actually sued** and not just complained about. Will any attorney willing to take this on -- especially one who has a good rapport with the local US Attorney -- please contact me. I want to see an actual violation of federal law, with names on it, presented to a grand jury or a federal judge. Will anyone help? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 12:14:57 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Modem Coach" by Blankenhorn et al BKMDMCCH.RVW 961214 "The Modem Coach", Dana Blankenhorn/Kimberly Maxwell/Kevin Stoltz/Tommy Bass, 1993, 1-56205-119-9, U$18.95/C$24.95/UK#17.76 %A Dana Blankenhorn %A Kimberly Maxwell %A Kevin Stoltz %A Tommy Bass %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1993 %G 1-56205-119-9 %I MacMillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$18.95/C$24.95/UK#17.76 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 http://www.mcp.com %P 239 %T "The Modem Coach" Once upon a time, if you wanted to get the most out of a printer, you had to be able to read the manual and figure out the commands. Nowadays printers come with drivers the major word processing programs, and vice versus. In the future, modems will be as easy to install and use as printers are today -- but they aren't, yet. Thus the heart and soul of a modem book has to deal with installation and setup. The current work falls short, in this regard. Initialization strings and modem commands are referred to fleetingly, and without adequate explanation. It is assumed that installation will work out OK without assistance -- a staggering leap of faith where modems are concerned. Setup of the communications software is also confidently expected to be trouble free. The review of BBSes and online services is brief, but reasonable given the space. Chapter six, though, dealing with support software, is surprisingly good. So, too, is the chapter on viruses -- not great, but free of the most egregious and common errors. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKMDMCCH.RVW 961214 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 10:43:32 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Online Deskbook" by Bates BKOLDSKB.RVW 961214 "The Online Deskbook", Mary Ellen Bates, 1996, 0-910965-19-6, U$29.95 %A Mary Ellen Bates %C 462 Danbury Road, Wilton, CT 06897-2126 %D 1996 %G 0-910965-19-6 %I Pemberton Press Books/Online Inc. %O U$29.95 800-248-8466 +1-203-761-1466 fax: +1-203-761-1444 online@well.com %P 274 %T "The Online Deskbook" Although the Internet comes first in the list on the cover, this book is really about a select group of commercial databases and online services. Within that context, however, Bates has provided a thorough and useful guide. If you want to use DataStar, DataTimes, DIALOG, Dow Jones, LEXIS/NEXIS, or Newsnet, you will find basic information, a description of services, commands, tips, a description of proprietary software (where available), and some evaluation and analysis. Similar information, with greatly expanded annotation, is provided for America Online, CompuServe, Microsoft Network, and Prodigy. The Internet is worth a book (or more) itself, of course. Even the brief chapter given to it, though, shows that Bates is nowhere near as comfortable with the net as with the commercial services. While the major Internet applications are described, and some of the more useful Web search sites, the material is comparatively skimpy. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKOLDSKB.RVW 961214 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ From: Pacific Telephony Design Subject: Automated Attendant Tutorial Now On-Line Date: 14 May 97 10:28:43 GMT News From Pacific Telephony Design Automated Attendant Tips We have just published an online article which explains how you can handle incoming calls to your office more efficiently. This article was written using the Altigen telephony server as an example, however, it is applicable to most auto-attendant enabled PBXs. We decided to write this article to educate current and future customers about ways to streamline the flow of incoming calls, and therefore to improve customer service. One of the things we have noticed is that many customers erroneously assume that it is always best to route incoming calls to a live receptionists. As the old saying goes, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." This is a perfect example. Often companies will answer all incoming calls with a live receptionist to add a human touch to the phone system. This is nice, and works fine when calls stream in at a steady, manageable pace. However, in reality, customers tend to call in clumps. What happens when many customers call at once? Most of them languish on hold while waiting to tell the operator who they want to talk to. The truth is that neither approach, always using an auto-attendant or always using a receptionist, is best for all situations. One of the nice things about PC based telephony servers is most offer many options for handling incoming calls. So, you can program these systems to route calls to a human after a short greeting (in which repeat callers can direct dial an extension), to send calls to an operator when the operator is free (otherwise to an auto-attendant), to send calls to a group of people instead of a single operator, and the possibilities go on and on. By adopting a hybrid approach where you route some calls automatically, and others with the help of a receptionist, you can substantially reduce the time it takes a caller to reach live help without degrading customer service. To read more about this, go to: http://www.phonezone.com/support/altigen-attendant-tips.htm ------------------------------------------------------------ The Phone Zone Newswire - (c) 1997 Pacific Telephony Design Joining and Leaving The List To join or leave this or other e-lists, simply go to http://www.phonezone.com/newswire.htm You'll find a simple form which you can use to sign on and sign off of our lists. ------------------------------ From: Michael Jones Subject: Network Manager Needed For Large Biotech Company Date: 13 May 1997 15:42:33 GMT Organization: Roche Bioscience Network manager/analyst needed for biotech company in Palo Alto, Ca Roche Bioscience (formerly Syntex - one of the top ten company's to work for). Must be very knowledgeable with tcp/ip; have good knowledge of ethernet, LAN's and WAN's. HP OPenview skills a plus. call (415) 855-5218 ------------------------------ From: dpeschel@u.washington.edu (Derek Peschel) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: 14 May 1997 08:43:50 GMT Organization: University of Washington, Seattle In article , the TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as > bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying > that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture > of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] Lucky for us that Enrico Fermi created the first workable nuclear reactor (at the University of Chicago -- IIRC in the squash courts!) _before_ the city council came up with that silly rule. Some (not me) might even argue that the city council should be _glad_. Anyway, the threat of being nuked might make the rule hard to enforce. Derek ------------------------------ From: jhines@enteract.com (John B. Hines) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 11:00:13 GMT Organization: The Conspiracy rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) wrote: > I heard on the radio yesterday that the City of Parma, a suburb of > Cleveland OH, is considering legislation which would require that all > telephones within the municipal boundaries be in the same area code. > Presumably this is in response to the pending split of 216. > Whether municipal government has authority over the topic is another >issue, of course. I wonder what affect this would have on business that use 800/888 and 900 number services? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It will not have any affect on such a business because 800/888/900 are not 'area codes'. They are 'access codes'. Admittedly people call them area codes but that is not what telco calls them. PAT] ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 13:38:16 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises Steven Colins wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as >> bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying >> that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture >> of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] > Pathetic? I don't think so -- it is just the wish of a city to have a > unifying area code, to give the place some "identity". Afeter all, > someone has to top this proliferation of area codes ... or the term > will simply lose it's meaning. However, the province of the national numbering plan and local area codes is not the jurisdiction of any local government having been given exclusively to the FCC and state Public Utility commissions respectively. As to stopping the proliferation of area codes, the only way that can happen is to stop the proliferation of more telephones. Perhaps that's something you want, but millions more don't. There are only limited possibilities to handle ever increasing telephones (and obviously telephone numbers). Within any are code there is a limit of 10 milliondifferent numbers (less actually when you factor out certain unusable number sequences). Given that reality,area codes must split when they exhaust the numbers available. Is there an alternative? Yes, if you want to go to an eight digit phone number, but who wants that? The implications of the change that would be involved are massive. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 14:21:37 GMT In article , Steven Colins wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as >> bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying >> that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture >> of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] > Pathetic? I don't think so -- it is just the wish of a city to have a > unifying area code, to give the place some "identity". Afeter all, > someone has to top this proliferation of area codes ... or the term > will simply lose it's meaning. The desire is not what is pathetic. The legislation is what is pathetic. It's as if they tried to outlaw rain. They have no control over either. If the state PUC approves a split right through town, they'll have a split right through town. City governments don't get to overrule state governments, even if they might like to. In fact, I'd suggest that this particular law *increases* the chances that there will be an area code split within the city limits, just so some power-hungry ego-driven PUC commissioner can show them who the boss is. Then when the split happens, they'll spend a gazillion dollars fighting and losing in one court after another. (I grew up in St. Louis County, not too far from Ladue, MO, where they tried to defend a law banning political signs but allowing some other signs all the way to the Supreme Court. They lost. Then they reworded the law and tried again, and again lost all the way to the Supreme Court. fortunatley, it wan't my Tax Dollars being wasted on it.) Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ... Coming soon to a | Brett Frankenberger .sig near you ... a Humorous Quote ... | brettf@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And in Chicago, the city has tried for years to enforce a ban on 'for sale' signs placed in front of houses. Let's face it, they are starting to get frantic. Everyone with money or the ability to live elsewhere is leaving town as rapidly as they can. So what do you do when large numbers of citizens move out and leave fewer and fewer behind? Just ask the Chicago City Council: you become more oppressive and dictatorial than ever with those who remain. On three different occassions now, the Supreme Court has struck down ordinances in Chicago banning 'for sale' signs as an infringment on the free speech rights of the property owners. So the city makes slight revisions in the ordinance and starts over again. They get sued, they drag it out for years, eventually lose and proceed to write a similar ordinance. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bernhold@npac.syr.edu (David E. Bernholdt) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: 14 May 1997 15:53:16 GMT Organization: NPAC, Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, NY, USA In article , Mark Steiger wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is pathetic. That is almost as >> bad as the time the Chicago City Council passed an ordinance saying >> that Chicago was a 'nuclear free zone' and that the manufacture >> of nuclear weapons within the city limits was prohibited. PAT] > In Iowa City, IA they did that too. There are little signs all over > the city that have a nuclear bomb mushroom cloud with a circle around > it and a line through it. Rather funny, yet pathetic. On the other side of the coin ... I lived for several years in Richland, WA, home of the Hanford Reservation, where the government produced plutonium for nuclear weapons for many years. They were actually rather proud of it, with establishments like Atomic City Bowling and one of the high school teams being called the Hanford Bombers. There have also been quite a variety of t-shirts sold in the area with humorous boasts about their status. Of course the site employs about 1/3 of the local population, and until some time in the 1960s you couldn't live there without permission of the government ... By the way, the site still employes about 1/3 of the local work force, but now they're mostly trying to clean up the mess left behind by the plutonium production. David E. Bernholdt | Email: bernhold@npac.syr.edu Northeast Parallel Architectures Center | Phone: +1 315 443 3857 111 College Place, Syracuse University | Fax: +1 315 443 1973 Syracuse, NY 13244-4100 | URL: http://www.npac.syr.edu ------------------------------ From: aljon@worldnet.att.net (John Stahl) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 16:19:02 +0000 Doesn't anyone know what is causing this mess of new area codes (AC's)? It's very simple, it is the proliferation of the multiple telephone numbers that started when the FCC opened the US market for Cellular phone service back in the early 80's. Instead of following the prevailing European cellular model at the time that assigned a whole bunch of (what amounted to be) new AC's to this specialized wireless service, the FCC told the US cellular A/B providers and (re-)sellers to go to the telcos in their local service areas and obtain exchanges (NXX's) for their own specialized use. That methodology has quickly robbed all the telephone numbers originally slated for wire-line expansion from the telcos causing them to have to add new AC's to get enough telephone numbers to satisfy both their demand and that of the cellular users. So here we are, over ten years into wireless and the major cities have already split their AC's many times and now smaller markets (MSA's) are having to plan the same. The 'system' is now struggling with what to do to solve the glut of telephones for both wire line and wireless that are bring sold as far as future telephone numbers are concerned. What's going to happen with the new PCS market starting to come on line? Are we going to be able to use our existing telephone numbers or will this new wire-less service require masses of new phone numbers (more NXX's, here we come)? If the latter happens, we may very soon totally run out of AC's! Then what's next, 15 digit or 20 digit phone numbers to be dialed to call your neighbor's phone across the street? Isn't it wonderful how BIG Government screws things up? They never seem to learn from either their own mistakes or learn from other's who have already 'solved' the problem! Finally, what good does it do for Ohio (or any other legislative body) to 'ban' something like future AC-splits? As long as there is a demand for wire-line and wire-less services, with the supposition that the method of assigning telephone numbers can't (or won't be) changed, the present method seems likely to be the prevailing one for the forseeable future! If you want more phones, more AC's will be the 'penalty'. John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecommunications and Data System Consultants email: aljon@worldnet.att.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As a closing note, I want to stress that I am *serious* about filing suits and trying to get the federal law enforced where spammers like Wallace are concerned. I haven't the money to pay for an attorney but will gladly cooperate with any attorney seeking plaintiffs in such a case. Please contact me. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #121 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 16 01:39:02 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA08270; Fri, 16 May 1997 01:39:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 01:39:02 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705160539.BAA08270@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #122 TELECOM Digest Fri, 16 May 97 01:39:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 122 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 1997 ICFC Agenda (BDACXGR@NJCORP3.BELL-ATL.COM) When Regulators Attack Area Codes (Dave Levenson) Telephony History and Preservation (Ben-Zion Y. Cassouto) Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Michael Wright) Telecom Engineer Needs in NJ (John Smith) Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (Peter Laws) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: BDACXGR@NJCORP3.BELL-ATL.COM Subject: 1997 ICFC Agenda Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 19:40:47 -0400 1997 International Communications Forecasting Conference "Dynamic Market Structures & Evolving Customer Needs: The Role of Demand Analysis & Forecasting" Sir Francis Drake Hotel, San Francisco June 24-27, 1997 Conference Schedule Web Site: http://www.econ.ilstu.edu/icfc/home.htm This is the agenda for the 1997 ICFC. Abstracts of the papers are available on our Web site. Please note that the early registration date is May 23rd. At that time the block of rooms held at the Conference rate at the hotel will be released. Registration information is provided below. Please contact Farhad Sabetan 510-823-3547 if you have addtional questions. The International Communications Forecasting Conference is a professional forum for telecommunications forecasters, demand analysts and planners. The ICFC provides opportunity for discussion, presentation, and review of emerging issues as they pertain to telecommunications forecasting and planning, demand analysis, business research and cost analysis. June 24 TUESDAY 6:30PM - 8:30PM RECEPTION & DINNER June 25 WEDNESDAY 8:30AM - 10:00AM KEY NOTE SPEECH "The Road to Local Competition: Opportunties and Risks" Dr. William E. Taylor, Senior Vice President National Economic Research Associates, Inc. 10:30AM - 12:00Noon CONCURRENT SESSIONS Session 1A PRICE CAPS AND LOCAL COMPETITION 97-03 The Road to Price Caps in Canada Chris Dineen - Bell Canada 97-17 Local Telecommunications Competition: What Is It and Will We Get It? Willie Grieve, Barrister and Solicitor Stanford L. Levin, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville 97-44 Regulatory Dynamics In The Changing Telecommunications Sector From The Regulatory Point Of View Tuula Broman-Saaristo Session 1B Chair: USING FORECASTING FOR DECISION MAKING, WORKLOAD PLANNING, AND PROVISIONING 97-18 Alternative Futures: Forecasting for Business Decision Making Alan M. Gross, Bellcore 97-34 Characterizing a Fast-Changing Workload in a Telephone Order System: A Case Study Neale Hirsh, Bell Atlantic 97-35 Hi Tech To Nuts & Bolts Of Forecasting Problems: Right Answers Require A Range Of Mix & Match Donald B. Brout, Think Systems Corporation Session 1C Chair:THE INTERNET: DEMAND, TELEPHONY IMPACT & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 97-08 Quantifying the Effect of Internet Telephony From Both Telecommunications and Internet Service Provider Perspectives Nicholas J. Scalera, Louis Rubin, Bellcore 97-11 Innovative Business Models Towards The Adoption Of Wide-Scale Electronic Commerce In Business To Consumer Markets Prof. dr. Rene W. Wagenaar, KPN Research 97-15 Determinants of Demand for New Services: The Internet as an Example Dr. Morten Falch, Technical University of Denmark 12:00Noon - 1:30PM LUNCH - provided 1:30PM - 2:30PM CONCURRENT SESSIONS Session 2A Chair: IMPROVED TECHNIQUES FOR UNDERSTANDING THE CUSTOMER 97-14 Market Segmentation Analysis Krzysztof Dzieciolowski Bell Canada 97-16 Societal And Economic Trends As A Source For The Identification Of New Telecommunication Markets - A New Demand Oriented Forecasting Paradigm Rainer Koenig, Deutsche Telekom AG Session 2B Chair: DEMAND FOR OPTIONAL CALLING PLANS IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS 97-05 Discrete-Choice Analysis Of Optional Tariff Demand Characteristics In Germany Dieter Elixmann, WIK 97-42 A Growth Model of Optional Calling Plan Penetration Steve Zhang, AT&T Session 2C Chair: NEW RESEARCH IN TOLL DEMAND 97-21 A Pattern of Inter-regional Toll Demand: Korea Case Yongkyu Kim, Myeongho Lee, and Mr. Yong-Sub Yum Korea Information Society Development Institute 97-38 Competitive Own and Cross-Price Elasticities in the IntraLATA Toll Market Donald J. Kridel, University of Missouri, St. Louis Paul N. Rappoport, Temple University Lester D. Taylor, University of Arizona 3:00pm - 4:00PM CONCURRENT SESSIONS Session 3A INTERNET ACCESS IN THE RESIDENTIAL MARKET: ESTIMATING DEMAND AND IMPACT 97-39 The Demand for Access to On-line Services and the Internet Donald J. Kridel, University of Missouri, St. Louis Paul N. Rappoport,Temple University Lester D. Taylor, University of Arizona 97-46 The Impact of The Internet on The Demand for Residential Local Access Lines Mohammed B. Abrar, Bell Canada Session 3B FORWARD-LOOKING BANDWIDTH SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUES 97-26 Telecoms Traffic Forecasting - The Need for Speed Ian Hall & Fraser Burton, BT Labs, UK 97-28 Forecasts and Risk Analysis of PNO and CATV Operators by Introducing Broadband Upgrades in the Access Network Kjell Stordahl, Leif Aarthun Ims, Borgar Torre Olsen, Telenor Network AS Session 3C PRICE CAPS: THE X-FACTOR, PRODUCTIVITY & INPUT PRICES 97-12 Total Factor Productivity Measurement by the Stentor Companies and their Proposed Productivity Offset under Price Cap Regulation Judi Bodnar, Bell Canada 97-19 Setting The Offset Factor In The Price Cap Formula TBA, Bell Canada 4:00PM - 5:00PM CONCURRENT SESSIONS Session 4A PENETRATION STUDIES: BASIC ACCESS VERSUS SATIATION 97-29 Affordability of Telephone Service: A New Model for Improving Telephone Penetration Rates Eleanor K. Murray, Field Research Corporation 97-30 Limits To Growth In Telecom Markets? Jan-Petter Saether, Norwegian Telecommunications Authority Session 4B ANALYZING RESIDENTIAL DEMAND FOR COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES 97-49 Residential Customer Demand for Complex Telecommunications Packages B. Goungetas and J. Watters, SBC Communications, Inc. Session 4C ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO ANALYSIS AND FORECASTING IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS 97-01 An Application of Chaos Theory to the Dynamically Evolving Telecommunications Industry Structure Neal C. Stolleman, Bellcore 97-41 Forecasting With Artificial Neural Networks J. Stuart McMenamin, Regional Economic Research, Inc. 5:00PM - 6:00PM WINE AND CHEESE RECEPTION June 26 THURSDAY 8:30AM - 10:00AM KEYNOTE SPEECH "Telecommunications: A Wall Street Perspective" Peter Darbee, Chief Financial Officer and Controller Pacific Bell 10:30AM - 12:00Noon TOWN MEETING - MERGER MANIA This Town Meeting will be moderated by Robert E. Stoffels, the former editor of "America's Network" the industry's leading technology- focused trade publication. Panelists: Peter Darbee CFO Pacific Bell James G. Melonas Bell Atlantic Integration Control Team Leader Bell Atlantic Wayne Graham Senior Manger, Financial Planning & Reporting PTI 12:00Noon - 1:30PM LUNCH - PROVIDED 1:30PM - 2:30PM CONCURRENT SESSIONS Session 5A FORECASTING IN WIRELESS FOR PRODUCTS AND POSITION 97-20 Discrete Choice Analysis for Product Design and Pricing: A PCS Case Study Laura J. Hopkins, Terry J. Atherton, Cambridge Systematics Moshe Ben-Akiva, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 97-43 Market Forecasting of CDMA Commercialization in Korea Dr. Seung Hee Choi, ETRI, Korea Session 5B THE UNEXPECTED IN FORECASTING: INHERITED ERROR AND CREATED OPPORTUNITIES 97-32 Forecasting Tertiary Telecommunications Market Opportunities James Shaw, University of San Francisco 97-37 Who Can You Trust? Using the Best Macroeconomic Forecasts David G. Loomis, Illinois State University Session 5C CRADLE AND GRAVE MARKET ANALYSIS 97-24 Diffusion Pattern of Telex Service in KOREA Kyung Hwan Cho, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute 97-48 A Bayesian Approach for Estimating Target Market Potential with Limited Geodemographic Information Daniel S. Putler, Purdue University and University of British Columbia Kirthi Kalyanam, Santa Clara University James S. Hodges, University of Minnesota 3:00PM - 4:00PM CONCURRENT SESSION Session 6A TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND FORECASTING ON THE INTERNET 97-36 What's New on the Internet in Telecommunications and Forecasting? David G. Loomis, Illinois State University Session 6B IMPROVED FORECASTING & ANALYSIS EMPLOYING DATA BASE SOLUTIONS 97-02 RevSys - A Database Solution To Forecasting Consolidation & Reporting J. Brown - NYNEX 97-45 Data Warehousing & Activities Based Costing R. L. Woerner, Pacific Bell Session 6C Session Title: "TO BE DETERMINED" 97-51 Proxy Models: Who Said That Dreams Can't Become Reality? Victor Glass, National Exchange Carrier Association 97-13 Network Information Management: The Tool For Success In The Ever Growing Telecommunication Market David Brogdon, Bear Creek Technologies 4:00PM - 5:00PM Concurrent Sessions Session 7A CHALLENGES TO FORECASTING DUE TO REGULATORY AND MARKET EVOLUTION 97-23 Future Challenges Facing China's New Telecommunications Entrant: A S.W.O.T Analysis Of 'China Unicom' Xu Yan, Douglas C. Pitt, Niall Levine, Strathclyde Business School, UK 97-47 How US, European & International Telecommunications Competition Law and Regulatory Policy Affect Market Forecasting Mark Naftel, Belgacom Session 7B CUSTOMER CHOICES FOR NEW SERVICES 97-06 Enhancing Consumer Choice Models Through Application Of In-Depth Analysis Of Behavioral Drivers Doug Clark, Southwestern Bell Communications, Inc. 97-31 Analysis Of Customer Expectations For The Introduction Of New Telecommunications Dr. Ing. Bartolomeo Sapio & Isabella Maria Palumbino Fondazione Ugo Bordoni Session 7C CHOICES FOR LONG DISTANCE CARRIERS 97-40A Using Tobit Regression To Analyze Consumer Churn Among Long Distance Carriers R. Bruce Williamson and Jain-Shing Chen, SBC Communications 97-40B Modeling Consumer "Spells" with Long Distance Carriers R. Bruce Williamson, John S. Watters, and Basile Goungetas, SBC Communications June 27 Friday 8:00AM - 9:30AM TOWN MEETING on the INTERNET This Town Meeting will be moderated by Padmanabhan Srinagesh, Principal, Charles River Associates, Incorporated. Panelists: Professor Hal Varian, Dean, School of Information Management and Systems, UC Berkeley Professor Lester Taylor, Professor of Economics and Professor of Agriculture and Natural Resource Economics, University of Arizona Craig Partridge, Senior Scientist, BBN Corporation and Adjunct Faculty, Computer Science, Stanford University Milo Medin, Vice President, Networks Systems, @Home 10:30AM - 12:00 Noon FREE TUTORIALS Telecommunications Forecasting Survey Design And Analysis Dr. John Colias of the M/A/R/C Group Neural Networks And Demand Forecasting Dr. Richard Hoptroff of Right Information Systems ----------------------------------------- PRE-CONFERENCE SEMINARS AT A SPECIAL DISCOUNT Register directly with the Seminar sponsor and indicate you will be attending the ICFC. Classes will be held at the Conference Hotel. "Customer Choice: Empirical Methods for Analysis & Forecasting" UC-Berkeley June 23-24, 1997 510 642-6649 http://elsa.berkeley.edu/eml/icfc.html "Technology Forecasting For Telecom Industry" Technology Futures, Inc., June 22-24, 1997 800 TEK-FUTR http://www.tfi.com "Business Forecasting on the IBM PC Business Forecasting Systems, Inc. June 22-24, 1997 617 484-5050 http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/forecastpro ----------------- REGISTRATION FORM If you wish to register for the conference now, please fill out the form below and mail, fax or e-mail to the address indicated. The early registration fee is $745.00 in US dollars Before May 23, 1997. After May 23, 1997 the registration fee will be $795.00 in US dollars. For joint participants (early registration and one of three seminars), the fee is $695.00 in US dollars. However, if you register late and attend a seminar, the fee will be $745.00. Payment may be made by check, money order or credit card. First Name_____________________ Last Name_____________________________ Company Name & Title__________________________________________________ Street _______________________________________________________________ Prov./State_______________Country_________________ Postal Code/Zip________ Tel.________________Fax______________Internet e-mail__________________ Method of Payment: Check [ ] Money order [ ] Credit Card [ ] If Credit Card: American Express [ ] Visa [ ] Mastercard [ ] JCB [ ] Diner's [ ] Enroute [ ] Discover [ ] Card Number_________________________ Exp.Date_________ If Check or Money order, please make payable to "ICFC 1997", and send it to: ICFC 1997 Attn: Don Gorman 204 Murray School Road Pottstown, PA 19465 Voice: 610-469-0515 Fax: 610-469-6626 Internet e-mail: don.gorman@worldnet.att.net If you pay by credit card, please call, send fax or e-mail to Don Gorman with the information requested. HOTEL ACCOMODATIONS All hotel reservations must be booked by the conferee. Call the Sir Francis Drake Hotel directly at 415-392-7755 or 800-227-5480 for reservations. Be sure to mention that you are attending the 1997 ICFC in order to receive the special room rates. REGISTER EARLY SINCE THE SPECIAL ROOM RATES CAN ONLY BE GUARANTEED UNTIL MAY 23, 1997. ------------------------------ Subject: When Regulators Attack Area Codes Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 20:09:42 EDT From: Dave Levenson Organization: Westmark, Inc. Reply-To: dave@westmark.com While Parma, Ohio attempts to regulate area codes, I am reminded that a New Jersey lawmaker, several months ago, proposed legislation which would have made it illegal for Bell Atlantic to split a municipality between area codes. A Bell Atlantic spokesperson pointed out that the effect of the proposed legislation would have been a change in the full ten-digit telephone numbers of thousands of New Jersey residents. Nobody pointed out, in the ensuing public debate, that some New Jersey municipalities have straddled area code boundaries for years, and somehow, the residents all survive. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. Voice: 908 647 0900 Web: http://www.westmark.com Stirling, NJ, USA Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: Ben-Zion Y. Cassouto Subject: Telephony History and Preservation Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 15:04:01 +0200 Reply-To: benzion@il.ibm.com I am seeking users, switchmen and network operations professionals with an interest in telephony history, particularly North American, urban, 1920-1975. I am collecting info and recordings, particularly re: urban Panel, XBAR 1, OST, PST networks: 1. Routing and other network operations info/documentation. 2. Audio recordings of call placement and office tone signals. I have assembled a very thorough survey of over 50 NY City area panel, xbar 1, xbar 5 offices - recordings and routing information. Included are Office Selector Tandems, Panel Sender Tandems (eg: Suburban Tandem), XBAR 1 tandems and some toll as well. I am also seeking an interested organization/institution for archiving, display and preserving for research, of these materials. I would appreciate all feedback ... ------------------------------ From: voe@telalink.net (Michael Wright) Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 12:53:15 GMT Organization: Telalink Corporation, Nashville, TN, USA Bemson wrote: > My family and I benefited greatly from a research report posted about > the dangers of cellular phone usage in association with brain tumors > and cancers. > I know little to nothing about phones or electronics, so I > would like to know if cordless phones pose a similar threat, or to > understand how the differences in engineering make have not caused a > concern for cordless phones. There is no research out there that has established ANY causal relationship between cell phones and brain tumors. And there never will be. A cell phone operates with a transmitter power of only 3/4 of a watt. As you read this, you are sitting in a far more powerful electromagnetic field, the one generated by your computer monitor. As to cordless phones, they operate with a transmitter power of 100 milliwatts (one-tenth of a watt) so they, too, constitute no hazard whatsoever ... at least from the magnetic field. By way of comparison, many radio stations throw off 100,000 watts ( one million times the energy of a cordless phone) and the transmitter personnel sit in that electromagnetic field all day, every day with no problems. The cellphone / brain-tumor *scare* is just another example of Junk Science Meets Tabloid Media. Michael ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 10:07:43 -0400 From: jds99@aol.com (John Smith) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Telecom Engineer Needs in NJ The company that I work for is looking for Telecom Engineers for assignments in New Jersey. Should be fairly knowledgeable about features of digital switches and/or transmission (carrier) equipment, and/or operations systems. Retirees or "downsized Telco folks" would be a good fit. EE or equivalent is preferred. If you know anyone who might be interested please reply to this mail and I will connect you with correct person. John Smith jds99@aol.com ------------------------------ From: plaws@cherokee.wildstar.net (Peter Laws) Subject: Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Date: 15 May 1997 16:48:01 -0500 Organization: Wildstar Internet Services Interesting how this thread keeps coming back. I've collected some info on Fire Alarm Telegraph Systems and have it posted at http://www.wildstar.net/~plaws/scan/box.shtml. Always looking for more. Peter ******** lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) wrote in comp.dcom.telecom (TELECOM DIGEST): > I was wondering if other cities have removed their boxes. They've been > gone in Trenton NJ for years. See http://www.wildstar.net/~plaws/scan/box.shtml for a list of cities that have kept their systems. Click on the image of Hudson, Mass Box 5111 to hear what a Gamewell 10" station gong sounds like. Being in a fire alarm office when a box came in, or better, when a box was repeated to the stations, is quite a rush if you're into legacy systems. > Actually, when I was a child, I was confused by emergency training. I Me too. All the films talked about boxes, but our suburb of Montreal never had them! ******** jmolter@pitnet.net (JeepMan) wrote in comp.dcom.telecom (TELECOM DIGEST): > corners. Pull box one side unlocked and on other side police call > to call in to stations. May add surviving Police boxes to the list. Early versions had a handle that was used to select the message to be sent to HQ. Some (me included) believe that the police radio "ten codes" come from telegraphic police boxes, i.e. 10 taps on the key follwed by 4 more meant "message received". Easier than teaching officers the (American) Morse code, I guess. The Boston FD still uses 10 codes on the remnant of their telegraph systemi, i.e. when 10-1-5 is transmitted, watch officers lower firehouse flags to half-staff to honor the death notice that follows. ******** oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) wrote in comp.dcom.telecom (TELECOM DIGEST): > Many of the boxes also contained an old-fashion morse code key inside > the box, which could be unlocked by the arriving firemen and used to > send messages back to the firehouse. Certainly quaint by today's > standards! Actually, that job would usually fall to the chief's aide. Most often, the aide would tap out a prefix, then trip the box again. For a 2nd alarm at box 1511, he might tap out 2, 2, then trip the box to trnsmit 1-5-1-1 again. Much of the telegraph terminology survives today. "Alarms" (as in third alarm, fourth alarm, etc) are still used in many places. A "still alarm" is either an alarm reported by telephone or an alarm reported by a citizen showing up at the firehouse - either way, the bells stay still. A chief that calls in extra resources rapidly is said to be "leaning on the hook" ... > The beauty of the system was its simplicity. And no doubt the reason why many cities still have them. > I worked with the City of Boston in 1969-72, and I recall a number of Boston's system, the first, recorded it's first alarm on April 26, 1852. It's still recording alarms, though the box circuits feed the CAD. > Anyway, the city had long since stopped maintaining its own wires in > most locations and was getting dry copper from New England telephone I'm not sure this is still true, given the amount of radio traffic between Fire Alarm and the wire crews about grounds, shorts, etc. > technicians had been experimenting with what other data or voice they > might be able to run over the same copper loops, but datacom in those Vancouver, BC, Canada pulled their boxes in 1995 and are also experimenting with data transmission. > seismographs, used spring driven clockworks and ink pens mounted on > the ends of magnetic arms to keep a permanent record of the exact > time and date of each alarm. All the systems I've seen punch the tape. The watch officer would have to manually record the date/time/box number in the house journal. > Or, as Ogden Nash wrote: > there isn't any three-L lllama. (*) Mr Nash obviously wasn't a "spark". Peter Laws / plaws@wildstar.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #122 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 17 09:04:00 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA00471; Sat, 17 May 1997 09:04:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 09:04:00 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705171304.JAA00471@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #123 TELECOM Digest Sat, 17 May 97 09:03:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 123 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Marvin A Sirbu) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Ben Parker) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Ronald Elliott) Re: Call Display (Caller ID) Formats? (Peter Morgan) Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (John Nagle) Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (Martin McCormick) Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Robert Casey) Re: Network Switching (Tim Russell) Employment Opportunity: Dallas/Kansas City ATM (Andy Nelson) Working With the Public on the Telephone (Robert S. Hall) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Marvin A Sirbu Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 17:21:41 -0400 Organization: Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Anthony S. Pelliccio wrote: > I have a second line in my home that I use as a second voice line and > as a modem line. Why should I have to pay more for it? In essence I'm > being penalized for having the additional line. Right now you are getting your first line for less than what it costs, with the difference made up by long distance callers. So what you are saying is why shouldn't you be entitled to two subsidized lines instead of only one? Sounds greedy to me. > In my not so humble opinion the FCC should be abolished. The only > thing that needs regulation is RF spectrum, not wired communications. If the FCC were abolished, the first thing that would happen is that prices would begin to approach actual cost, which means the price of _both_ of your telephone lines would go up, instead of the price of only one of them. Actually, since the ILECs do not face effective competition, the prices would likely go up to something substantially above cost. And, since, in the absence of an FCC to enforce interconnection rules, no competitors would be able to get into the local exchange market, prices would likely stay at monopoly levels indefinitely. Are you sure that's what you want? Marvin Sirbu ------------------------------ From: bparker@interaccess.com (Ben Parker) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 05:50:56 GMT Organization: Best Effort Co. Reply-To: bparker@interaccess.com On Sun, 11 May 1997 21:17:34 EDT, Wlevant@aol.com wrote: > [... Telephone recorded > announcement services were quite often 1234 or 1515. PAT] Nowadays the Hyatt hotel chain uses the xxx-1234 number for most of its hotels. Ben Parker ............ (Oak Park IL) .......... bparker@interaccess.com ------------------------------ From: Ronald Elliott Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 21:36:00 -0400 Organization: Sprint Internet Passport Reply-To: ronell@null.net A.T.Sampson wrote: > Here in Atlanta, BellSouth will question you until eternity if you try > to put a second line in an address that has existing service under a > different name. They made my roomate get a notarized letter from our > leasing office stating that we both lived there before they would turn > up his phone line in the apartment! > As for using a second (or third, or fourth) person's name, I'm not > sure how that will work. If your name (and SSN) are on file for 1 > line, and (pretending that you managed to get past the interrogation > about multiple lines in the same residence) your wife's name and SSN > are on the second line -- what happens if you need a third? Use little > Bobby's name and SSN? > Probably a non-issue for most, but I have to wonder because I have > three analog lines and an ISDN line here. > So, (at least in BellSouth land) the question becomes -> what happens > if this FCC ruling is interpreted to mean "first line at one physical > address"? So now we bring in the second line through a competetive carrier, or the cable company, or the electric company. How do we keep this mess equitable? Ronald Elliott ronell@null.net ------------------------------ From: Peter Morgan Subject: Re: Call Display (Caller ID) Formats? Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 06:02:57 +0100 In message robertb@iaw.com (Rob Barnhardt) wrote: > Anyhow, to the question: is there a good source for Caller ID formats > out there? I'm interested in info for any country, any device, just > so long as it's reasonably solid; You'd have fun with the UK (British Telecom) Caller ID ... (some cable companies are not using the BT method of sending the ID data before the ring, so that US modems will work without change). In the UK, we have a number of formats (based on analysis of the codes database which Oftel issues: Format count of areas (approx) Examples 0 abc - dex - xxxx 14000 0161-877 1006 Manchester 0 abcd - exxxxx 58000 01524-8xxxxx Lancaster 0 abcd - exxxx 1000 01695-50202 Skelmersdale 0 abcde - xxxxx 150 015242-xxxxx Hornby 0 abcde - xxx 10 018885-5xx Turriff (dialled from outside UK would miss the leading "0" but I don't know whether any of our numbers are displayed abroad, as yet ... on our caller ID we can see text like "INTERNATIONAL", "PAYPHONE", or get the number, "WITHHELD" or "UNAVAILABLE" [where privacy hasn't been requested by the subscriber but the carriers don't manage to pass ID info, or the exchange doesn't yet send it]) It seems that the originating exchange formats the data which is seen by the recipient, and sometimes the hyphens do not appear in the correct location, though they could just be ignored, as in a Hayes dial string they would be! > Do I have to start reverse-engineering Visual Basic programs? Probably :-) Peter Morgan, North Wales, UK. ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 18:36:43 GMT oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) writes: > And on the firehouse end, there was equally intersting equipment, > including paper tape printers which, looking like time-recording > seismographs, used spring driven clockworks and ink pens mounted on > the ends of magnetic arms to keep a permanent record of the exact > time and date of each alarm. San Francisco still has some of that gear. A clockwork driven paper tape inker, still part of that system, can be seen in a glass case just outside the front of the Ferry Building. The SFFD is very traditional. I visited the SFFD dispatch center in 1978, and although they had a computerized dispatching system with big display boards that was quite advanced for the day, all the old clockwork inkers for the fire alarm boxes were still functioning. In normal operation, a PDP 11/70 received the alarm signals, looked up the box location, and recommended what to dispatch, but the inkers were still logging the alarms as well. I suspect they're still there. A huge brass telegraph key and brass gong still sat on each console, as a communications backup to the fire stations. John Nagle ------------------------------ From: Martin McCormick Subject: Re: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Date: 16 May 1997 20:55:08 GMT Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater OK I remember pull boxes in Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Little Rock in the sixties. I believe they were mostly gone by the seventies. I lived in the Little Rock area from 1966 through mid 1968 and the had a whale of an ice storm some time during the Winter of 66-67. The Little Rock fire chief got on television and told everybody to not use the pull boxes if there was an alarm because many of them would not operate due to ice in the mechanism. He also said that response time would be much slower because of the large amount of ice coating streets. Martin McCormick ------------------------------ From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 06:48:16 GMT In article waf6@columbia.edu writes: > My family and I benefited greatly from a research report posted about > the dangers of cellular phone usage in association with brain tumors > and cancers. > I know little to nothing about phones or electronics, so I > would like to know if cordless phones pose a similar threat, or to > understand how the differences in engineering make have not caused a > concern for cordless phones. The power level of the radio frequency energy is much less than that of a cell phone. And the frequencies are different: cell ~850Mhz, some cordless ar 49MHz, some at 900MHz. Not a lot of difference between 850 and 900MHz, but the power level is much lower than cellular. Cellular has a range of a few miles, cordless about a hundred feet. Cordless should be safer, if in fact that there is even a cancer problem involved (it's just one study, and others were inconclusive or negative). ------------------------------ From: russell@probe.net (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: Network Switching Date: 16 May 1997 05:07:13 GMT Organization: Probe Technology Internet Services Simon Edgett writes: > For the > duration of the call the call centre ends up paying for two trunks > plus double the LD. Assuming the outsource partner and the call > center use the same LD and trunk provider for the inbound circuits, is > there an easy way to do network level switching to actually re-route > the call at the network level to the outsource company. Current plans > are to use AT&T US. I worked for a very large 800/900 service bureau for two years ending a couple of years ago, and wrote a few 800 programs that did something close to what you're asking for. As I remember, calls came in to the client's system, and depending on whether or not they had manpower to accept the call volume, the call was given back to AT&T and sent to our system (sorry, West Interactive's.) If my program still didn't get them what they wanted, we gave the call back to AT&T once again to be put in queue on the client's IVR system. Needless to say, these people were a bit anal about getting the customer satisfied, but I suppose that's to be applauded. :-) Anyway, the system worked through touchtones -- my program sent out a *2, I believe, to have the call sent back to the client. Keep in mind that this was done by a very large service bureau who is more than likely AT&T's single largest minute customer -- we broke 25,000,000 minutes in a month while I was there, and the numbers have risen ever since. I'm not sure if they can/will do this for just anyone. The feature name to mention is "Take Back and Transfer". Good luck. Tim Russell System Admin, Probe Technology email: russell@probe.net ------------------------------ From: Andy Nelson Subject: Employment Opportunity: Dallas/Kansas City ATM Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 10:39:59 -0400 Organization: MR of Reston I have several opportunities for individuals in the Dallas and Kansas City areas. Individuals should have experience with ATM, Sonnet, and using netexpert. This person will be managing devices, creating rules and dialogue for switches for fault set translators in case one fails. H-1 or know af anybody that is interested, e-mail me at mreston@erols.com Pay depends on experience, but I will tell you that he will make you a very fair offer. Andy ------------------------------ From: Robert S. Hall Subject: Working With the Public on the Telephone Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 17:21:31 +0800 Pat: A friend just forwarded this to me. After reading it, I thought you might be interested in it for one of your editions. There are plenty of discussions in the Digest about the technology which makes this person's job possible. Now, for a change, we see things from his perspective. Cheers, Rob Hall Hong Kong (After Surviving 130,000 Calls From The Traveling Public) By: Jonathan Lee-The Washington Post I work in a central reservation office of an airline company. After more than 130,000 conversations-all ending with "Have a nice day and thanks for calling"-I think it's fair to say that I'm a survivor. I've made it through all the calls from adults who didn't know the difference between a.m. and p.m., from mothers of military recruits who didn't trust their little soldiers to get it right, from the woman who called to get advice on how to handle her teenage daughter, from the man who wanted to ride inside the kennel with his dog so he wouldn't have to pay for a seat, from the woman who wanted to know why she had to change clothes on our flight between Chicago and Washington (she was told she'd have to make a change between the two cities) and from the man who asked if I'd like to discuss the existential humanism that emanates from the soul of Habeeb. In five years, I've received more than a boot camp education regarding the astonishing lack of awareness of our American citizenry. This lack of awareness encompasses every region of the country, economic status, ethnic background, and level of education. My battles have included everything from a man not knowing how to spell the name of the town he was from, to another not recognizing "Iowa" as being a state, to another who thought he had to apply for a passport to fly to West Virginia. They are the enemy and they are everywhere. In the history of the world there has never been as much communication and new things to learn as today. Yet, after asking a woman from New York what city she wanted to go to in Arizona, she asked "Oh, is it a big place?" I talked to a woman in Denver who had never heard of Cincinnati, a man in Minneapolis who didn't know there was more than one city in the South ("wherever the South is"), a woman in Nashville who asked "Instead of paying for my ticket, can I just donate the money to the National Cancer Society?", and a man in Dallas who tried to pay for his ticket by sticking quarters in the pay phone he was calling from. I knew a full invasion was on the way when, shortly after signing on, a man asked if we flew to exit 35 on the New Jersey Turnpike. Then a woman asked if we flew to area code 304. And I knew I had been shipped off to the front when I was asked, "When an airplane comes in, does that mean it's arriving or departing?" I remembered the strict training we had received-four weeks of regimented classes on airline codes, computer technology, and telephone behavior -- and it allowed for no means of retaliation. We were told, "it's real hell out there and ya got no defense". You're going to hear things so silly you can't even make 'em up. You'll try to explain things to your friends that you don't even believe yourself, and just when you think you've heard it all, someone will ask if they can get a free round-trip ticket to Europe by reciting 'Mary Had a Little Lamb'." It wasn't long before I suffered a direct hit from a woman who wanted to fly to Hippopotamus, NY. After assuring her that there was no such city, she became irate and said it was a big city with a big airport. I asked if Hippopotamus was near Albany or Syracuse. It wasn't. Then I asked if it was near Buffalo. "Buffalo!" she said. "I knew it was a big animal!" Then I crawled out of my bunker long enough to be confronted by a man who tried to catch our flight in Maconga. I told him I'd never heard of Maconga and we certainly didn't fly to it. But he insisted we did and to prove it he showed me his ticket: Macon, GA. I've done nothing during my conversational confrontations to indicate that I couldn't understand English. But after quoting the round-trip fare the passenger just asked for, he'll always ask: "... Is that one-way?" I never understood why they always question if what I just gave them is what they just asked for. But I've survived to direct the lost, correct the wrong, comfort the weary, teach U.S. geography and give tutoring in the spelling and pronunciation of American cities. I have been told things like: "I can't go stand-by for your flight because I'm in a wheelchair." I've been asked such questions as: "I have a connecting flight to Knoxville. Does that mean the plane sticks to something?" And once a man wanted to go to Illinois. When I asked what city he wanted to go to in Illinois, he said, "Cleveland, Ohio." After 130,000 little wars of varying degrees, I'm a wise old veteran of the communication conflict and can anticipate with accuracy what the next move by "them" will be. Seventy-five percent won't have anything to write on. Half will not have thought about when they're returning. A third won't know where they're going; 10 percent won't care where they're going. A few won't care if they get back. And James will be the first name of half the men who call. But even if James doesn't care if he gets to the city he never heard of; even if he thinks he has to change clothes on our plane that may stick to something; even if he can't spell, pronounce, or remember what city he's returning to, he'll get there because I've worked very hard to make sure that he can. Then with a click of the phone, he'll become a part of my past and I'll be hoping the next caller at least knows what day it is. Oh, and James ... "Thanks for calling and have a nice day." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for passing this along. My friend Jim who operates the bus station in Skokie has related the same things many times: people who call and ask, 'give me a list of all the places you do to and the price for each ...' presumably all 2800-3000 towns. People who ask 'what time does the bus arrive?' without knowing where the bus started from, what time it left, etc. All they know is a friend or relative said they would arrive today 'sometime'. People who say they want to go to (name of a state) with no idea of which town in the state. People who call repeatedly over and over, asking slightly different questions each time, then comparing the answers given each time and trying to start arguments. "Well I called yesterday and was told, etc ..." when the fact is they phrased their question differently the day before and got it answered in the way they asked. Another bunch of people with very thick skins are telephone operators and directory assistance operators. Ask any operator if she does not get cussed several times per day and accused of making wrong connections, charging too much for the call, etc. The American public is difficult to work with at times. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #123 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun May 18 08:19:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA13772; Sun, 18 May 1997 08:19:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 08:19:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705181219.IAA13772@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #124 TELECOM Digest Sun, 18 May 97 08:19:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 124 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Survey Says Almost All Americans Want to Censor the Net (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Electronic Democracy" by Browning (Rob Slade) Spam! Now I'm -> REALLY <- P*ssed Off! (North Coast Communications) Re: We Have Been Attacked. Reward Offered (Brent Marshall) New Media Group Attack, Update, Clarification (Jim Youll) Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone (Lee Winson) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Ed Ellers) Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes (Nevin Liber) Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab (Joey Lindstrom) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 17 May 1997 13:11:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Survey Says Almost All Americans Want to Censor the Net Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 21:54:29 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh Subject: Survey says almost all Americans want to censor the Net [Of course, I'd like to see another question asked: Do you think a Bible Belt prosecutor should be able to threaten you with a prison sentence and a $250,000 fine if you post offensive material on your web site? --Declan] ******************** Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 14:16:47 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brock N. Meeks" Subject: Survey says "Censor!" RADNOR, Pa., May 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Despite the fact that 29 percent, or nearly one-third, of all Americans access the Internet, 4 of 5 say they are concerned about what can be found, and who might find it, while cruising the Information Superhighway. In a recent nationwide telephone survey of a random sample of Americans ages 18 and older conducted by Chilton Research Services, 80 percent of respondents answered "Yes" when asked, "Do you think that the government should take steps to control access to pornographic or sexually explicit material on the Internet to protect children and teens under 18 years of age?" A significantly higher percentage of women than men favored government intervention. More than 88 percent of women invite censorship or some other action, while 71 percent of men feel such steps are warranted. Respondents were similarly divided by economic and education levels. In all demographic categories a resounding majority wants to limit youngsters' access to sexually explicit material on the Internet, but some groups feel more strongly than others. For instance, among households with incomes below $35,000 annually, 85 percent want Uncle Sam to step in. Among respondents with household incomes above $50,000 the percentage drops to 71 percent. Similarly, 9 in 10 respondents with a high school diploma or less said the government should control access, while 7 in 10 who had at least attended college want such action taken. In addition to worrying what their children might see on the Internet, Americans worry about what others might be able to learn about their private lives. Better than 5 of every 6 respondents (84 percent) said they are concerned about unauthorized or illegal access to personal and financial information through the Internet. A solid majority (65 percent) of all respondents said they were "very concerned," while another 19 percent admitted to being "somewhat concerned." Fewer than 10 percent of respondents were "not at all concerned." Those with less than a high school education and those over 65 years of age expressed less concern, possibly because these groups are not as likely as others to use the Internet. The Chilton EXPRESS telephone omnibus survey was conducted among a sample of 1,000 American men and women ages 18 and older, between April 16 and April 20, 1997. The margin of error is +/- 3 percent. Chilton Research Services, an ABC-owned company, was established in 1957. The company offers full research and consulting services to consumer products companies, business and industry, telecommunications and media, non-profit organizations and government agencies. SOURCE Chilton Research Services CO: Chilton Research Services ST: Pennsylvania IN: PUB CPR MLM SU: 05/13/97 13:57 EDT http://www.prnewswire.com This list is public. To join fight-censorship-announce, send "subscribe fight-censorship-announce" to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu. More information is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 10:35:51 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Electronic Democracy" by Browning BKELCDEM.RVW 961210 "Electronic Democracy", Graeme Browning, 1996, 0-910965-20-X, U$19.95 %A Graeme Browning brow@clark.net %C 462 Danbury Road, Wilton, CT 06897-2126 %D 1996 %G 0-910965-20-X %I Pemberton Press Books/Online Inc. %O U$19.95 +1-800-248-8466 203-761-1466 fax: +1-203-761-1444 online@well.com %P 200 %T "Electronic Democracy: Using the Internet to Influence American Politics" Maxwell's "How to Access the Federal Government on the Internet" (cf. BKHAFGOI.RVW) tells what your (US) government can do for you. Casey's "The Hill on the Net" (cf. BKHILNET.RVW) is a kind of personal memoir of exploration of the use of technology among politicians. Browning here provides the basics, background and case studies for grassroots use of the net to affect and influence the political process. The first three chapters contain anecdotal accounts of specific political events that have been influenced by net-based activities. This is readable, interesting, and even informative, but many similar works go no further. Browning proceeds to advise on acceptable tactics on the net, as well as the potential downside to political use of the Internet. There is a brief look at some related technologies, and a set of resources (which the author admits are personally selected and not exhaustive). A realistic, useful, and balanced guide. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKELCDEM.RVW 961210 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 00:40:08 EST From: North Coast Communications <0005082894@mcimail.com> Subject: Spam! Now I'm -> REALLY <- P*ssed Off! Since December I have been virtually flooded with this stuff. Recently I had to change several internal company mailboxes at MY expense, as they have been filled to capacity, making normal business operations impossible. There are two recent spams though that really take the cake. Both are trying to sell me either mailing lists or software designed to extract addresses from Use(less)net newsgroups. Both spammers extoll the "virtues" of doing business in this way. They discuss other ways of obtaining mailing lists as well, such as subscribing to lists that allow you to get names and e-mail addresses of other subscribers. Wouldn't it be a shame if somebody actually obtained a copy of this wonderfull software, modified it in such a way that it would "backfire" (DEL *.* perhaps?), and re-released it via BBS'S to other wannabe spammers? Not that -> I <- would recommend anything like that. ^ For readers who might be interested in obtaining spamming software I offer the following sources. The one with the "800" number will be of particular interest. PATS usual admonishments about the usefullness of PBX's and payphones apply here. Only serious inquiries please, although several repeat calls may be necessary till you make up your mind. 1.) E-OFFERS.COM extract@e-offers.com Todd or Theresa Farmer 800-541-3010 (Ext. 118) 4401 Fletcher / Suite 200 ^^^ Wayne MI 48184 313-728-5210 (Live Answer!) 2.) PCPAYOLA.COM phoenix@leonardo.net Robert Gantt Phoenix Interactive 213-737-1494 (Live Answer!) P.O. Box 88506 Los Angeles CA 90009 213-737-1497 (Fax) Have phu....er..fun! Michael Fumich (Copies of the actual spam available on request. You have to read it to believe the nerve of these people! Pat, if any attorney contacts you to take this on, a class action suit perhaps, contact me. Lets begin with Spamford!) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would love to begin with Spamford. I would love to bang him around very, very hard; at the very least run up his legal bills in defending himself. I think he needs to be totally silenced and put out of business one way or another, within the bounds of legality of course. Ditto for AGIS. If a few attornies would provide their time and services on a pro-bono basis, it would be really great to see Spamford getting sued six ways from Sunday all at the same time in different jurisdictions all over the United States. Wishful thinking on my part though I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ From: brentmar@erols.com (Brent Marshall) Subject: Re: We Have Been Attacked. Reward Offered. Assistance Requested. Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 18:21:22 GMT On Thu, 15 May 1997 17:59:22 -0400, in comp.dcom.telecom was written: > My domain newmediagroup.com is under attack by someone who doesn't > like my MILITANT, PUBLIC ANTI-SPAM stance. To date their actions have > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I too have really had all I can handle > of this and I am soliciting the assistance of any attorney who wishes > to volunteer. Jay Ashworth has pointed out to me in recent correspondence > Will any attorney willing to take this on -- especially one who has a > good rapport with the local US Attorney -- please contact me. I want > to see an actual violation of federal law, with names on it, presented > to a grand jury or a federal judge. Will anyone help? PAT] You may wish to contact the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice? According to the following page on the DOJ WWW server, http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/, there is a Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section in the Criminal Division. A search on that Web server uncovered a reference to a Computer Crime Unit in the General Litigation Section (I assume that this is a predecessor group) and gives a contact number of 202-514-1026. Hope that helps. Regards, Brent Marshall brentmar@erols.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sorry, I would not count on them to do a thing, at least on the basis of any individual complaints. They are like a lot of other federal agencies supposedly involved in enforcing laws and standards: they go where the money is and to the corporations with a lot of influence. You can bet if AT&T or MCI or Sprint said some two-bit phreak had hacked a password and gotten into some dinky computer of theirs, the feds would stage a massive raid, confiscate anything they found which remotely looked like a computer or a telephone, and demand huge fines, jail terms and the whole bit. But you have to understand one thing: the federal government, and in particular the law enforcement agencies DO NOT like the internet and the ease with which average people are able to speak and express themselves. Large corporations dislike the net also. People having so much ability to speak and communicate their ideas and the news without having to go through authorized channels such as the {New York Times} or the {Chicago Tribune} is starting to bother them a lot. When the police for example were able to go to their mouthpieces at the newspapers and spread a few vicious stories, etc with impunity while you and I had to beg the editor's permission to get a line or two printed in the 'Letters to the Editor' column everything was cool. But now the public is able to say what they want, when they want and to whom they want. This is not good news where the government is concerned. Add to this the fact that the newspapers themselves are not very happy having to deal with this new media -- oh yes, they have web pages and all; they have to be in the loop, like it or not -- and see just how far some complaints to the government will get you. I suspect that even if they do not actively encourage people like Spamford Wallace to pollute the net, there is a sort of benign encour- agement given. If the government and the large corporations can just turn their backs and ignore his antics, he'll manage to completely wreck what little is still left of the newsgroups and mailing lists saving the government the trouble of having to dismantle the whole thing and coming off like the bad guys in the process. Then twenty years from now the government and the corporations can say, "gee, isn't it too bad the way the internet and the newsgroups were made almost useless for the common person, the same way Citizen's Band Radio was wrecked twenty years earlier." I mean, you are talking to someone now -- me! -- who went through this same scene twenty years ago with CB Radio. To me this is like sitting through the same movie a second time; I saw CB Radio start out as an extremely nice medium for the common person; I saw the equivilent of 'newsgroups' on the various CB channels (frequencies); I heard a lot of people exchange a lot of valuable information and news via CB. Then the equivilent of the spammers took over, jamming the frequencies with super high- powered radio signals. I'll bet you think that 'Make Money Fast' started with Usenet newsgroups. I heard those same letters almost word for word read over the radio blasted through two-thousand watt linear amplifiers. And yes, the pedophiles worked the CB chat groups as did the Nazi people, the cultists and everyone else. When the government in the form of the Federal Communications Commission finally got a bellyfull of it, the FCC enforcement agents would show up -- not at the door of the 'spammers' -- but at the premises of some nerdy CB'er with a two watt radio who happened to be slightly out of frequency or a little above the legal power limits. They would kick the door down, go in and start smashing up the radio, arrest the poor guy, etc. Please do not delude yourself about which side the government is on. The government needs the likes of Spamford to do their dirty work for them; i.e. to see this medium get rotted out from the inside out. Haven't you noticed the only real enforcement going on is directed at the group of hackers who it is alleged have 'disrupted' the major spammers? We are always hearing that 'an investigation is under way regards hackers who caused a disruption in service at some-spammer.com ...' but when is the last time you heard of an investigation into the unlawful transmission of unsolicited messages to facsimile machines? Never; nor are you likely to. The Department of Injustice is far too busy maintaining pedophile sting operations and responding to complaints made by AT&T about phreaks to assign anyone to enforce a law about unsolicited stuff sent to fax machines. So, in response, I should ask the government for help? Surely you jest. I suspect a few very high-powered attornies breathing on them might provoke some action, but I think private litigation might be more effective or just as effective. Any attornies out there want to start pushing Spamford around a little? Count me in as a plaintiff! PAT] ------------------------------ From: jim@newmediagroup.com (Jim Youll) Subject: New Media Group Attack, Update, Clarification Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 20:25:09 -0400 Organization: New Media Group, Inc. Hello. For those of you who follow such things, it's been an interesting couple of days here. I will have an update at the website sometime before Monday morning, but no promises about exactly when. Another bombing run apparently happened overnight, and we received well over a thousand bounces this morning. The receiving system claims they were sent at around 0900 (local time in UK/ 0400 EDT) from ISPAM.NET. Our ISP was quite upset, but understanding, and we have rearranged things to shift more of the load off his systems and onto ours. I continue to seek assistance both in the form of information, and in general support from the Internet community. A major crime was committed and I believe those who perpetrated it must be punished. But I cannot do this alone. We all need to stand together against such terrorist intimidation tactics. And we have to do it now. As a united group. The press have been covering these things VERY poorly. It is time to educate journalists and let them know this isn't just a "pranksters" making merry, as one local writer here described it. A past message of mine has led to some confusion (including my own) about the reward offered. I will clarify that now, and I apologize for posting in the middle of the night after working all day to harden a system against attacks (while simultaneously trying to stop the same attacks). However ... Effective May 16, 1997 at 0:00 EDT I am offering a reward of US$2,500 for information leading directly to the arrest and conviction of the individual or individuals responsible for the inbound mailbomb attack on New Media Group servers, and for the outbound transmission of thousands of fraudulent messages, bearing my name as the sender, which began at approximately 9:20 EDT on May 14, 1997 and continued through at least 0400 EDT on May 17. This reward is for real, the money is out of my pocket, and any payout will be administered by the law firm which is representing me. There may be additional terms and conditions related to the payment of this reward. I will leave it to the attorneys to work out the fine print, and when I have that, I will post it to the website on which I am trying to keep current information: Good day, and thank you for your support. Oh yeah, support. I need all the support I can get right now. This is not a one-guy fight. It's sort of lonely out here. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think I speak for most readers here in wishing you luck in getting this resolved. The time has come for the community to begin taking a very agressive stance on spam. We need to begin demanding that there be enforcement of the laws and at the same time use our own attornies to begin litigation. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone Date: 18 May 1997 02:02:40 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS In books about Grand Central Terminal, NYC, they always include similar types of questions the information booth receives, such as: "I came in on the 8:25, what time does it depart?" "Have you seen my wife?" and so on.... But in fairness to the general public, today's extremely complex fare and schedule structures do not make it easy for both the public and service agents. This applies to airline fares, banking fees, credit cards, health insurance, and just about everything else that has centralized 800 numbers serving a very large group of people. People SHOULD read back quoted fares and double check them with the agent because there are so many combinations. In a recent trip I called back to double check and saved me $100 -- the agent merely keyed in my trip plans slightly differently and the computer came up with a different fare (exact same travel plans.) Look at how many plans there are in telephone long distance service, and how often they change. Being a telephone service agent is a very tough job, and not well paying. The turnover is very high, and as a result, the agents are not really that familiar with their company's policies. All they can do is pull up stuff on the computer -- assuming they pull up the right stuff. I've often had to coach agents to get them to look in the right place. Even banks have fallen to the lure of marketing gimmicks with nonsensical interest rate tables with no logic flow. My own bank offers 3,4,6,7,8,9,11 month CDs at basically the same interest rate, but the 5 and 10 month CDs will be at a much higher rate and different rules. And now that we have super banks covering entire states, the central service centers have to deal with many different variables, because some regional differences still remain as holdovers. A service center telephone agent may formerly have worked for a different bank and not quite familiar with present rules (or absent for the last training class -- the rules change so frequently.) I suspect the marketing people change the rules frequently on purpose, so that what was once a money-saving plan becomes expensive when the rules switch, but consumers don't bother changing their arrangement to keep up. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In fairness to the traveling public, the train which *arrived* at 8:25 is not necessarily going to *depart* at the same time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 14:11:09 -0400 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Our editor, Pat, wrote in reply: > "And in Chicago, the city has tried for years to enforce a ban on 'for > sale' signs placed in front of houses. Let's face it, they are starting > to get frantic. Everyone with money or the ability to live elsewhere is > leaving town as rapidly as they can. So what do you do when large > numbers of citizens move out and leave fewer and fewer behind? Just ask > the Chicago City Council: you become more oppressive and dictatorial > than ever with those who remain. On three different occassions now, the > Supreme Court has struck down ordinances in Chicago banning 'for sale' > signs as an infringment on the free speech rights of the property > owners. So the city makes slight revisions in the ordinance and starts > over again. They get sued, they drag it out for years, eventually lose > and proceed to write a similar ordinance." Dunno about Chicago, but it's said that some cities have passed these ordinances to combat "blockbusting" -- a disgusting practice where someone in the real estate business arranges for a black family to move into an all-white block, convinces the neighbors that they need to sell out (to the crook) while their house is still worth something, then sells the houses to black families at grossly inflated prices, ripping off both the buyers and the sellers (except, perhaps, for that first black customer). The ban on "for sale" signs is intended to reduce the pressure that a flock of such signs might place on the holdouts. (Of course, in some cases the idea might also be to discourage blacks from moving into the neighborhood in the first place ... but it's hard to tell. No doubt both motives have been involved in different places.) FWIW, the city of Louisville, Kentucky, also passed a "nuclear-free zone" ordinance a while back. Exactly how they are supposed to be able to enforce it is an open question, considering the level of security (under Federal law) that surrounds nuclear weapons work. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The idea here was to prevent blockbusting also but the Supreme Court said they would have to figure out some way of doing it without infringing on the free speech rights of people to put signs in their yard. The city is allowed to regulate to some extent the size and placement of the sign, but not the wording, nor the size and placement to the extent the sign becomes impossible to read at a short distance away. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nevin@cs.arizona.edu (Nevin ":-]" Liber) Subject: Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban Multiple Area Codes Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 07:41:06 -0700 Organization: University of Arizona CS Department, Tucson Arizona In article , aljon@worldnet.att.net (John Stahl) wrote: > Doesn't anyone know what is causing this mess of new area codes > (AC's)? It's very simple, it is the proliferation of the multiple > telephone numbers that started when the FCC opened the US market for > Cellular phone service back in the early 80's. It isn't just cell phones. There are the huge numbers of devices that cheap CPUs made possible, such as fax machines, modem lines, credit card point-of-sale machines, pagers, ATM machines, etc. Also, it is not uncommon for a person to have three or four unique phone numbers just to be able to get a hold of them (home, work, cell, pager). > Instead of following > the prevailing European cellular model at the time that assigned a > whole bunch of (what amounted to be) new AC's to this specialized > wireless service, the FCC told the US cellular A/B providers and > (re-)sellers to go to the telcos in their local service areas and > obtain exchanges (NXX's) for their own specialized use. That solves the problems of cell phones and pagers. But what do you do about the other devices, where having them easily identified by an area code would be a bad thing due to all the spammers and crackers out there? Nevin ":-)" Liber (520) 293-2799 ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Sat, 17 May 97 14:04:02 -0700 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab On Mon, 12 May 1997 04:35:03 -0400 (EDT), someone@telecom-digest.org wrote: > Reminds of the story I heard, likely in this newsgroup, about the > woman whose phone number she'd had for many years was similar to a > brand new large hotel. She'd get many mis-dialed calls for the hotel. > She tried talking to someone at the hotel but get a rude reception. > She then started confirming all the room reservations she got. Then > the front desk had to deal with all the angry customers who had no > reservations. They got a very bad reputation. Similar story here: Years ago, while working at a local taxi dispatch office, we discovered that our number was very similar to a local pizza delivery place. Usually on Friday and Saturday nights, we'd get drunks phoning up asking for a large pepperoni and mushroom, extra cheese. The funny part was that no matter what you said to these people, all you'd get out of them would be "how long for my pizza?" Finally, we just started accepting the pizza order. "You want anchovies with that?" The best part was that the pizza place had a "39 minutes or it's free" delivery policy. Sure enough, these boneheads would phone back 40 minutes later ... "HAH! You idiots didn't get my pizza here in 39 minutes so it's free!" and we'd say "Absolutely sir! Tell the driver when he gets there that the pizza is free of charge". And these idiots never wondered why we never asked for their address. :-) Epilogue: some years later, I met up with a fella who, during the time in question, worked answering phones at the pizza place. And sure enough, on Friday and Saturday nights, they'd get people phoning 'em for taxis. And after fighting with them long enough, they too started taking the taxi orders! :-) It's amazing how people can place a phone call, and then complete that call, without actually LISTENING to a single word the other party says. How you could possibly confuse "Good evening, Checker Cabs" with "Good evening, Mother's Pizza" is beyond me ... From: The Desk Of Joey Lindstrom +1 (403) 620-4708 EMAIL: joey@lindstrom.com numanoid@netway.ab.ca lindstrj@cadvision.com WEB: http://www.netway.ab.ca/worldwidewebb/ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #124 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun May 18 09:07:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA16431; Sun, 18 May 1997 09:07:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 09:07:17 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705181307.JAA16431@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #125 TELECOM Digest Sun, 18 May 97 09:07:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 125 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Ed Ellers) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Stewart Fist) Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Joel Upchurch) Smart Prepaid Telephone Cards in Canada (jfmezei2videotron.ca) Re: Network Switching (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: When Regulators Attack Area Codes (Bill Sohl) Re: When Regulators Attack Area Codes (Nils Andersson) Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users (Al Varney) Internet Redirect Using SS7 -- ISPAN -- ISP Access Node (D. E. Hale) *69 Automatic Callback (Daniel Meldazis) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 17 May 1997 12:14:38 -0400 From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Marvin A Sirbu (sirbu+@andrew.cmu.edu) wrote: > Right now you are getting your first line for less than what it costs, > with the difference made up by long distance callers. So what you are > saying is why shouldn't you be entitled to two subsidized lines instead > of only one? Sounds greedy to me. How do you know this? For all you know, Anthony lives in a place where it's relatively easy to run the lines and therefore cheaper than average to provide service. > If the FCC were abolished, the first thing that would happen is that > prices would begin to approach actual cost, which means the price of > _both_ of your telephone lines would go up, instead of the price of only > one of them. Actually, since the ILECs do not face effective > competition, the prices would likely go up to something substantially > above cost. And, since, in the absence of an FCC to enforce > interconnection rules, no competitors would be able to get into the > local exchange market, prices would likely stay at monopoly levels > indefinitely. Are you sure that's what you want?" You're forgetting something -- actually fifty of them, the state commissions that regulate intrastate telephone rates. These are entirely capable of lowering rates, and of enforcing interconnection rules. ------------------------------ From: kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com.nospam (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: 17 May 1997 17:12:36 -0400 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. In article , Marvin A Sirbu wrote: > Right now you are getting your first line for less than what it costs, > with the difference made up by long distance callers. So what you are > saying is why shouldn't you be entitled to two subsidized lines instead > of only one? Sounds greedy to me. Sorry but I can't agree with that. The greedy ones are the LEC's and they have the FCC in their pocket. When you really examine it you can see the flaws in the FCC's argument to increase access line charges on secondary lines. While the rates for LD co's drop they don't go away all together and now they get to rape Joe subscriber once again. The administration has even come out and said that this has to be handled very carefully or else the consumer will be paying more, not less. Each month I average $70.00-$100.00 in long distance charges and you can bet they're getting more than an access line increase even if they did reduce the rate. > If the FCC were abolished, the first thing that would happen is that > prices would begin to approach actual cost, which means the price of > _both_ of your telephone lines would go up, instead of the price of > only one of them. Actually, since the ILECs do not face effective > competition, the prices would likely go up to something substantially > above cost. And, since, in the absence of an FCC to enforce > interconnection rules, no competitors would be able to get into the > local exchange market, prices would likely stay at monopoly levels > indefinitely. Are you sure that's what you want? I tend to think not. The FCC is interested in the big business and not the interests of the people. And in some regions there's full up competition -- here in RI it's looking like Nynex is going to be getting a lovely black eye ... awww ... poor Nynex. They're only worth umpteen billion. Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com Boston has the combat zone, Providence *IS* an erogenous zone. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 17:31:23 +1000 From: fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? Michael Wright (voe@telalink.net) writes: > There is no research out there that has established ANY causal > relationship between cell phones and brain tumors. Complete utter balderdash. Apparently this correspondent can't read. > And there never > will be. A cell phone operates with a transmitter power of only 3/4 of > a watt. As you read this, you are sitting in a far more powerful > electromagnetic field, the one generated by your computer monitor. So what? When viewers start jamming their heads up against the electronic guns in the back of the monitor, maybe they'll find reason to worry. Hasn't it ever occured to you that there may be differences in the frequency, pulsation, and a few other parameters. > As to cordless phones, they operate with a transmitter power of 100 > milliwatts (one-tenth of a watt) so they, too, constitute no hazard > whatsoever ... at least from the magnetic field. Right. Now you are actually starting to think. These devices are about one-sixth of an analog cordless, and about one-sixtieth of a GSM cordless. > By way of comparison, many radio stations throw off 100,000 watts ( > one million times the energy of a cordless phone) and the transmitter > personnel sit in that electromagnetic field all day, every day with no > problems. I would suggest that perhaps the invoice square law may be a factor here - also the lack of pulsation, the shielding, and a few dozen other things. And a number of studies have show an increase in problems with ham radio operators, military radio operators, military radar operators, police radar operators, merchant marine radio operators, diathermy opeators, plastic welding operators -- and a few other, I can't remember, off hand. > The cellphone / brain-tumor *scare* is just another example of Junk > Science Meets Tabloid Media. And this sort of a reaction is another example of the null that is created when the closed mind meets biomedical evidence. Stewart Fist, Technical writer and journalist. Current Australian columns: Archives of my columns are available at the Australian and also at the ABC site: Development site: Phone:+612 9416 7458 Fax: +612 9416 4582 Old Homepage: ------------------------------ From: Joel Upchurch Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 17:20:17 -0400 Reply-To: upchurch@bellsouth.net Michael Wright wrote: > There is no research out there that has established ANY causal > relationship between cell phones and brain tumors. And there never > will be. A cell phone operates with a transmitter power of only 3/4 of > a watt. As you read this, you are sitting in a far more powerful > electromagnetic field, the one generated by your computer monitor. > By way of comparison, many radio stations throw off 100,000 watts ( > one million times the energy of a cordless phone) and the transmitter > personnel sit in that electromagnetic field all day, every day with no > problems. I don't think claims that cell phones cause brain tumors are valid either, at least I haven't seen any persuasive evidence that they are but the claim isn't absurd on the face of it. The comparisons above are invalid, because neither of them are emitting an inch away from the brain. A monitor is at least two feet away, so it would have to be over 500 times as powerful to produce the same effects. As someone pointed out the frequency may be significant also. Exposures to the same amounts of visible light, microwaves and UV light can have much different effects on human beings. Also people can vary enormously in their sensitivity to various effects. UV light may cause nothing more than a tan for one person and trigger a malignant melanoma for another. Something that has no effect on 99.9% percent of the population, may kill the thousandth person. I wonder how much it would effect the range of a cell phone to move the antenna to the bottom of the phone? It seems to me that this would reduce any effects of the phones transmissions on the brain by at least an order of magnitude. The trouble is that some lawyer would use any design change as an admission that the previous design was unsafe. Of course, even if they do cause an occasional brain tumor the health risks are down in the noise compared cell phone related automobile accidents :-). ------------------------------ From: jfmezei <[nospam]jfmezei@videotron.ca> Subject: Smart Prepaid Telephone Cards in Canada Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 19:15:22 -0500 Organization: SPC Reply-To: [nospam]jfmezei@videotron.ca I have recently realised that the prepaid cards sold by Bell Canada in Quebec and Ontario to be used on the Nortel pay phones here are the same format as those sold by other telcos in Canada (Notably BC Tel). I assume that they are also the same as those used by other North American telcos. However, a card purchased in Quebec will not work on a telephone outside Bell Canada's territory, even if it is in Canada. For instance, at the Vancouver airport, a card purchased in Quebec will not work even though the phones are the same. While I can understand the reason behind this (BC tel didn't get any money when I bought the card in Quebec), I wonder about the usefulness of such cards as they are no good when travelling, the one time when those cards have the most value. Countries such as New Zealand and Australia have card systems which are valid everywhere in their country. So the question: Does the telco get enough information from a smart card transaction to be able to rebill the issuing telco? Could BC Tel, upon inserting my Bell Canada Card into their phone, not rebill Bell Canada for the cost of the call? Is there any hope of ever having a national prepaid card system in Canada? If not, why did the telcos bother with their rather useless local-only cards? ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: Network Switching Date: 17 May 1997 18:53:09 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates Tim Russell (russell@probe.net) wrote: > Simon Edgett writes: >> For the >> duration of the call the call centre ends up paying for two trunks >> plus double the LD. Assuming the outsource partner and the call >> center use the same LD and trunk provider for the inbound circuits, is >> there an easy way to do network level switching to actually re-route >> the call at the network level to the outsource company. Current plans >> are to use AT&T US. [ . . . ] > Anyway, the system worked through touchtones -- my program sent out > a *2, I believe, to have the call sent back to the client. > Keep in mind that this was done by a very large service bureau who > is more than likely AT&T's single largest minute customer -- we broke > 25,000,000 minutes in a month while I was there, and the numbers have > risen ever since. I'm not sure if they can/will do this for just > anyone. > The feature name to mention is "Take Back and Transfer". Good luck. Investigate a CLASS feature available from some carriers over ISDN PRI called TBCT -- Two B Channel Transfer. This allows you to ask the switch to take a call which has been terminated on one of your trunks and forward it to somewhere else. You'll still pay for it, but at least your trunks are free. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "To really blow up an investment house requires Tampa Bay, Florida a human being." - Mark Stalzer +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: When Regulators Attack Area Codes Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 17:45:39 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises Dave Levenson wrote: > While Parma, Ohio attempts to regulate area codes, I am reminded that > a New Jersey lawmaker, several months ago, proposed legislation which > would have made it illegal for Bell Atlantic to split a municipality > between area codes. But at least that would have been within the power of the state legislature to do so since the state legislature can impose new law(s) on the state PUC. > Nobody pointed out, in the ensuing public debate, that some New Jersey > municipalities have straddled area code boundaries for years, and > somehow, the residents all survive. My town lived for years under a split between Bell Atlantic and an independant. Neighbors separated by one street were charged as a toll call when dialing from one company area to another. That ended some time ago and the local flat rate area covers the whole town now. More recently, the town was split between area cdes 201 and 908. For an extended period of time we had permisive dialing between the two sets of CO NNX codes, but that has ended and no great outcry. Personally, I suspect we'll eventually all get to a ten digit mindset anyway within the next few years. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 22:06:49 -0400 From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: When Regulators Attack Area Codes In article , Dave Levenson writes: > A Bell Atlantic spokesperson pointed out that the effect of the > proposed legislation would have been a change in the full ten-digit > telephone numbers of thousands of New Jersey residents. > Nobody pointed out, in the ensuing public debate, that some New Jersey > municipalities have straddled area code boundaries for years, and > somehow, the residents all survive. The urge for legislative relief runs deep. Do we have a messianic complex here? There have been attempts to legislate that PI=3. I am waiting for attempts to regulate gravity by legislation. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Long-Distance Access Charges Draw Scrutiny From FCC, Users Date: 16 May 1997 21:56:35 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , AntiSpam2091744@ mcimail.com wrote: > The "hick town" that I live in is part of a state-wide phone co-op. We > currently have a digital switch, can get internet from the Phone Co., > and they offer ISDN. My last non-subsidized phone bill was $17 for 1 > month. Very much my own opinion follows: The "rural" cost argument is usually about the cost of outside plant, which is substantially more per rural line with 1970s technology. For rural SERVICES that are forced to treat that plant (and older switches) as a 40-year investment, there are cash-flow constraints that force higher costs on a per-line basis. Some smaller companies are not bound by "uniform accounting" rules that impose those costs on larger companies, so they can indeed reduce their costs when technology permits. Cost of capital can be less for some of those companies as well. A somewhat out-of-date comparison of RBOC ("Bell") companies vs. GTE/Independents from 1989 shows the following statistics: Average local revenue: RBOC $24.00/line/month Ind. $19.58/line/month Avg. Access Charge revenue: RBOC $16.09/line/month Ind. $21.41/line/month Avg. Total monthly revenue: RBOC $48.80/line/month Ind. $52.20/line/month So independents (with GTE) charge $4.42/line/month less to their customers and collect $5.31/line/month more from the IXCs. In effect, long distance calls are "subsidizing" local service in the independent networks to a greater extent than in the RBOC networks. For IXCs required to charge based on distance (and not the originating/terminating company), the higher access charges are an extra tax placed on the IXCs, and/or recovered from Universal Access funds. Another perspective: In 1989, 50% of RBOC revenue was from local charges, vs. 37.5% for Independents. And 33% of RBOC revenue was from Access Charges, vs. 41% for Independents. I'm sure access charge reform has (or will) substantially change these statistics. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ From: dehale@onramp.net (D. E. Hale) Subject: Internet Redirect Using SS7 -- ISPAN -- ISP Access Node Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 03:04:31 GMT Organization: OnRamp Technologies, Inc.; ISP DSC Communications of Plano, TX has a new piece of equipment on the market called the ISPAN. In brief what it does is redirect calls on the trunk side of the class V switch. It terminates the calls onto itself and feeds out PRIs or D4's to modem banks. It uses the SS7 network to redirect the call away from the expensive class IV switch or a terminating CLEC class V switch. It is being designed with controls for the common modem banking equipment used today by Ascend, Cisco, USR, and Livingston. It can be used in conjunction with Litespan 2000/2012 to redirect on the lineside of a class V switch and totally redirect calls away from switching equipment to the data network. The biggest draw to the ISPAN is it is inexpensive compared to a switch. A 28,800 port model goes for about $3,500,000 and a small 1900 line one for $500,000. Cheap compared to having to expand a clogged switch. If anyone is interested in this or discussion about it, post, email, or call me. I will happily call, send information, etc. (972) 477-9303 Work E-mail is dehale@ccmail.dsccc.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 20:06:10 -0500 From: Daniel Meldazis Reply-To: danielm1@flash.net Subject: *69 Automatic Callback Pat, I have been having a bit of a problem recently with someone calling my home and when I answer, hanging up. I have tried using *69, but when I do a message from the CO tells me that I am unable to use that service to call the number. How does someone block the use of *69 from their phone line? Thanks. Dan Meldazis Bridgeview, IL [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think the caller is doing anything to block their number; rather, it is a situation where the telco -- in this case Ameritech -- is not receiving the data and is thus unable to give it to you. Do you also have a Caller-ID box? If so, check and see if this same caller is showing up on the box as 'outside' or 'unavailable' as opposed to 'private'. Until very recently, calls from cellular phones were showing up as 'outside' because no arrangment was in place to deliver the data to the landline telco. Now Ameritech's cellular division at least is delivering the data to Ameritech as landline company, although I do not know if Cellular One Chicago is yet doing the same thing or not. Even if the call is coming from another landline phone, there seem to be a few instances -- such as many long distance calls -- where the calling number is not available to terminating telco. That still does not preclude the use however of more 'old fashioned' methods of catching the caller using traps set in the central office. I am assuming now this more drastic approach would be used if this situation continues or gets worse. To answer your basic question, there is no way the caller can deny you the right to call back. It may be telco will refuse to tell you *what number* is being called back, but they will still complete the call if possible. Oddity: the other day someone called me in the same way, ringing my phone and then hanging up when I answered. The number was shown on the Caller-ID display as 'private'. I tried to use Call Screening and other tricks to get the number read to me with no success. Finally I decided to do *69 and call it back. Guess what? Even though the local central office refused to give me the number, it was a one-way outgoing only line so when my CO attempted to put through the call the distant CO responded that, 'the number you have dialed, xxx-xxxx is not in service for incoming calls ...' so I got the information anyway. Meanwhile, adding the 'last call received' to my Call Screening still got me protests from my own CO that 'the number is a private entry', meaning it would not tell it to me. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #125 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 21 22:06:39 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA26139; Wed, 21 May 1997 22:06:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 22:06:39 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705220206.WAA26139@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #126 TELECOM Digest Wed, 21 May 97 10:06:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 126 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson `Dial Around' and Save? Often, the Answer Is No (Stan Schwartz) Book Review: "ISDN for Dummies" by Angell (Rob Slade) Denver Handful at Meetings: 84 for 3-Way Split, 50 for Overlay (D Heiberg) Book Review: "Learn Internet Relay Chat" by Toyer (Rob Slade) MCI Vision VIP Rates (Ted Rodham) How Do You Dial a Vanity 800 Number? (corny@worldonline.nl) 816 Relief Code Announced (John Cropper) Net2Phone Worse Than a COCOT! (Stanley Cline) New Toll-Free Number Coming (nwdirect@netcom.com) Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab (David K. Bryant) Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab (Nils Andersson) Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab (Ron Kritzman) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Stan Schwartz Subject: `Dial Around' and Save? Often, the Answer Is No Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 22:52:26 -0400 Kathy Kristof, Newsday, Long Island 5/18/97 THE LATEST SALVO in the continuing battle for long-distance calling dollars is an often misleading advertising blitz to "dial around and save." A host of so-called dial-around services with names like VarTec, Telco, Matrix and Telecom USA are blanketing airwaves and mailboxes urging consumers to use five-digit access codes before they dial a long-distance number. All the appeals claim huge savings - up to 50 percent off long-distance rates - but what they fail to mention is the discounts are gauged against AT&T's highest rates - not the rates you might be paying on a discounted calling plan. Moreover, many of the services assess fees and access charges that can overwhelm any savings you might otherwise enjoy from lower per-minute rates. "Because of the way the ads are worded, consumers get the impression they're still using their chosen long-distance carrier - just getting a discount," says Ken McEldowney, executive director of Consumer Action in San Francisco. "That's not the case. And as a result of the deceptive marketing, consumers are making bad decisions." Dial-around, dubbed "10-XXX services" because the five-digit dial-around access codes all start with the number 10, are not new. They've been around for more than a decade. However, they're getting new attention in today's hotly competitive phone market largely because many major telecommunications firms have abandoned attempts to get consumers to switch their primary long-distance carriers. Instead, they're refocusing their marketing on getting long-distance business one call at a time. Once you dial a 10-XXX access code, you leave the confines of your normal long-distance carrier and your normal long-distance rates. Your call is connected by the company that owns that access code, and your phone bill will reflect the 10-XXX company's rates. The trouble with that, consumer advocates say, is many consumers don't know the rate they are paying before they make the call. Consider, in a series of 30-second spots on both radio and television, a company called Telecom USA - actually a division of MCI Communications Corp. - maintains that consumers can save up to 50 percent off of AT&T's long distance rates. What the ads don't mention is that the savings are available only on calls lasting more than 20 minutes. Shorter calls are billed at MCI's normal long-distance rates, which are only a penny per minute less expensive than AT&T's highest rates and substantially more expensive than the rates offered through any of the big carriers' discounted calling plans. Matrix Telecom, which pitches dial-around by mail, claims 10-percent to 45-percent discounts for those who call the "instant savings" code. What's the per minute rate? They can't say. It varies based on where you call and when. But the discount claims are also gauged against AT&T's highest rates. A Matrix customer service representative acknowledged that anyone who is enrolled in a discount calling plan would pay more by calling Matrix "instant savings" code. Moreover, a number of other 10-XXX firms charge high per-call or per-month access fees. VarTec Telecom, for instance, advertises a 10-cent per-minute rate on calls lasting more than three minutes, but the company charges a $5 monthly fee. If you use the access code for just one three-minute call in a month, that call will cost you $5.30 - nearly 12-times more than what you would have paid by using AT&T's flat rate program at 15-cents per minute. Indeed, you'd have to make more than 100 minutes of long-distance phone calls in a single month before the VarTec deal actually would start saving -- rather than costing -- you money. If you find all the telephone claims confusing and need help sorting through it all, there are a number of sources of free help and information. The Tele-Consumer Hotline - a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit that is supported by several of the nation's biggest telephone companies - offers free dial-around shopping tips and a list of questions to ask a dial-around service. The tips are available on-line or via regular mail. To access them on the Internet go to www.teleconsumer.org/hotline or, to get a copy mailed to you, send a stamped, self-addressed envelope to Tele-Consumer Hotline, Dial Around, P.O. Box 27207, Washington, D.C. 20005. Consumer Action has just compiled a survey comparing rates of many major phone companies. To get a copy, send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to: Consumer Action, Long-Distance Survey, 116 Montgomery St., Suite 223, San Francisco, Calif. 94105. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 14:03:59 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "ISDN for Dummies" by Angell BKISDNDM.RVW 961210 "ISDN for Dummies", David Angell, 1995, 1-56884-331-3, U$19.99/C$26.99/UK#18.99 %A David Angell dangell@angell.com %C 155 Bovet Road, Suite 310, San Mateo, CA 94402 %D 1995 %G 1-56884-331-3 %I International Data Group (IDG Books) %O U$19.99/C$26.99/UK#18.99 415-312-0650 fax: 415-286-2740, +1-415-655-3299 %P 332 %S for Dummies %T "ISDN for Dummies" In chapter two, we are told the PRI (Primary Rate Interface, the large economy size of ISDN) is beyond the scope of the book. Fair enough, on a practical level, although conceptually rather odd. BRI (Basic Rate Interface) is what most home or small office users will want. But then why does Appendix B give us over forty pages of detail on ISDN wiring and power guidelines? This inconsistency of level is unfortunately typical of the book. The introductory section explaining ISDN and its benefits is vague and undependable. (Or even self-contradictory: we are told in one place that ISDN lines are $15 a month, and fifteen pages later they are $50 a month.) Yet chapters three and four, on the basic requirements for service, equipment, and setup, are very good. Much of chapters five through sixteen simply describe specific products. As usual, the later chapters give company contact information. Probably useful, but not altogether reliable. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKISDNDM.RVW 961210 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ From: Donald M. Heiberg Subject: Denver Handful at Meetings: 84 for 3-Way Split, 50 for Overlay Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 09:55:18 -0600 Submitted by Don Heiberg, Denver (303) 589-1539 For a few days, posted at: http://www.denver-rmn.com/business/0520code.htm Voters back plan for area-code split Handful of phone users vote on way to split overloaded 303 By Rebecca Cantwell Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer Those who attended recent metro Denver town meetings on area codes favor adding two new numbers to what's now the 303 terrain. Splitting the area code into east and west areas while leaving Denver in 303 won more votes than either of the other options. The votes are non-binding. The Public Utilities Commission will hear more testimony and decide the question in late July. At 10 town meetings around the area served by Colorado's first area code -- which now reaches from Bailey to Allenspark on the west and Elbert to Roggen on the east -- residential and business phone users voted on the choices. The "double split" of the area code garnered 84 votes of support, 60 from residential users and 24 from business, said spokeswoman Barbara Fernandez of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission. "People like it as a compromise," said Fernandez. "And they think it will preserve a sense of community. You can still call your neighbor using seven digits." In second place was the overlay option in which new phones throughout 303 would get a new area code but almost no one would have to change phone numbers. Fifty votes favored that option: 28 residents and 22 businesses. If the overlay is adopted, all local calls will require 10 digits and the same family could end up with two area codes by adding a second line. Least popular was the single area code split, in which Denver and the Tech Center would become the hole of a donut keeping 303, with the entire surrounding area getting a new number. Only 10 favored the option: eight residents and two businesses. The Public Utilities Commission held the meetings to solicit ideas in anticipation of a controversial decision. People could vote on business options if they had a business line or spoke for their business, and Fernandez said some voted as both residents and businesses. The meetings were "very poorly attended," Fernandez said, and several people predicted a public outcry no matter which option is selected. A formal public hearing will be held June 30 at 4 p.m. at commission offices, 1580 Logan St. The PUC expects to make a decision in late July after hearing testimony. Officials say the 303 area code will run out of numbers late next year. They cite population growth, the surge in second lines for fax machines and computers, the boom in wireless phones and pagers, and the increasing use of phone lines for such uses as checking credit card transactions. Under the option favored at the town meetings: -Most of Denver would keep 303 except for Denver International Airport. -Getting a new "east area" code would be Douglas, Arapahoe and Elbert counties and portions of Jefferson, Adams and Weld Counties. -A new "west area" code would be assigned to Boulder, Gilpin and Clear Creek counties along with most of Jefferson and parts of Park, Adams and Weld counties. Local calls in each of the three area codes would be dialed with seven digits. Ten-digit dialing would be required for local calls between the areas. The toll-free local area would not change. Those who want to comment before the hearing can write the PUC: Attention 97A-103T, 1580 Logan St. OL2, Denver CO 80203. Tuesday, May 20, 1997 Subscribe to Denver's #1 Newspaper (c) Rocky Mountain News ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 17:55:42 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Learn Internet Relay Chat" by Toyer BKLRNIRC.RVW 961210 "Learn Internet Relay Chat", Kathryn Toyer, 1997, 1-55622-519-9, U$19.95 %A Kathryn Toyer %C 1506 Capital Avenue, Plano, TX 75074 %D 1997 %G 1-55622-519-9 %I Wordware Publishing Inc. %O U$19.95 972-423-0090 fax: 972-881-9147 jhill@wordware.com %P 215 %T "Learn Internet Relay Chat" Toyer's Style is definitely hands-on and field independent. The book jumps right in with how-to and directions for use. The background and applications are terse: brief to the point of not making sense at times. The directions, however, are quite clear. You may not understand what the book is saying, but if you follow the instructions it *will* work. The book concentrates on Winsock client software but the commands given in chapter three should work with most programs, including those available under UNIX shell accounts. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKLRNIRC.RVW 961210 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse Please note the Peterson story - http://www.netmind.com/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 12:22:12 -0400 From: Ted Rodham Subject: MCI Vision VIP Rates Dear Listers, Just wanted to compare notes on what 011+ rate/minute (including discounts) some of you are being charged for dedicated service (T-1) to overseas destinations if you have an MCI 3-year term "Vision VIP Plus Worldwide Power Rate with CPR." I receive one discount for the three year commitment. I also receive a second discount based on a minimum dollar commitment/year which is $360K/year based on the tariffed rates. Of course with the two discounts, our annual dollar minimum is a good deal less than the $360K. I'd like to compare notes with someone in the same program. I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours! (What a deal!) Confidentiality respected both ways, of course. TIA Ted Rodham Telecom Manager Antelope Consulting ------------------------------ From: corny@worldonline.nl Subject: How Do You Dial a Vanity 800 Number? Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 22:22:48 GMT Organization: World Online Hi, I noticed that in the USA it's possible to use a mnemonic to dial a phone number. Suppose I'd want to dial 1-800-CLEANERS, what keys would I have to enter? Isn't it so that the letters A,B and C all represent one number (1 for instance)? So that a lot of numbers could make the word CLEANERS? Thank you for answering in advance. Regards, Cor. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, A,B, and C are on the '2' key, or opening on the dial. Although there are three letters associated with the digits two through nine on American telephones, there is no ambiguity since there is only one number for each group of three letters. Never mind what other letters also appear with the letter you want; just push the associated number. In the example you gave, 'CLEANERS' would be 25326377 which would be parsed as 253-2637 with the final 7 ignored by the telephone switching network. Where a problem might arise is with telephones in other countries which place the numbers, letters, etc in different positions on the dial. The main thing you have to concern yourself with is that only one number goes with each cluster of three letters, and the arrangement in the USA traditionally has been: 1 = no letters 2 = ABC 3 = DEF 4 = GHI 5 = JKL 6 = MNO 7 = PRS 8 = TUV 9 = WXY 0 = no letters The letters Q and Z are normally not used in words forming phone numbers. When they are used in other phone applications such as voicemail, they are not standardized. Frequently the Q will appear with the 1 and the Z with the zero, which instead of being zero clicks is actually ten clicks. Sometimes Q and Z will both be with the 1. You might want to check out the Telecom Archives file which deals with 'words to numbers' in telephone numbers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: 816 Relief Code Announced Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 23:08:16 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises Late Friday, BellCore posted the relief code for Northwestern Missouri. 660 will replace 816 in areas Northwest Missouri outside the St. Joseph and Kansas City calling areas later this year. Dates will be announced shortly, but approximate exchange lists are available on our site, based on Missouri PSC data released in April. John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 http://www.lincs.net/ The latest compiled area code information is available from us! NPAs, NXXs, Dates, all at http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Net2Phone Worse than a COCOT! Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 03:14:28 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com Just because I had nothing to do, I downloaded IDT's Net2Phone software (which allows calls to any *phone* over the internet.) They say to try calling any 800/888 number "for free", so I was going to try calling my own AT&T 500 number (via 1-800-CALL-ATT.) Guess what -- it didn't work! For some f***ing reason IDT has seen fit to BLOCK the Big Three's 800 calling-card/collect/500 access numbers! Yet they say *any* 800/888 number will work. Strangely enough, other MCI access numbers, and the access numbers for other, smaller calling card providers [which I will NOT disclose in the Digest, nor to IDT] were NOT blocked and went through fine. (This is horribly reminiscent of f***ing COCOTs, specifically some I have repeatedly warned the FCC and Georgia PSC about -- that block ALL 888 numbers PLUS CERTAIN 800 numbers. One calling card company, whose 800 and 888 access numbers have been blocked by "The Right Stuff"'s payphones, told me they're sending them a cease-and-desist order!) The email I sent to IDT: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 23:01:39 -0400 From: Stanley Cline To: billing@net2phone.com Cc: scline@nospam.mindspring.com Subject: billing RE: Blocking Certain 800 Numbers The following 800 #s are BLOCKED: 1-800-225-5288 [ATT] 1-800-321-0288 [ATT] 1-800-888-8000 [MCI] 1-800-674-7000 [MCI] 1-800-877-8000 [Sprint] All those are access to AT&T/MCI/Sprint calling card networks. Why are you doing this? And why are other carriers' access numbers *not* blocked? What are you afraid of? If you're afraid of being fraudulently reverse-billed, please check with your telco for LIDB/ANI flagging! ** IF YOU WERE A COCOT OWNER OR "REAL" TELCO, THIS WOULD BE A CLEAR VIOLATION OF FCC AND MOST STATE REGS. ** Besides, this makes AT&T's 500 number service (billed to the 500 customer via the use of a PIN or LEC/AT&T calling card) *completely* unreachable. (They must be dialed through the 800 numbers from payphones, where 0+ not available, etc.) Please see: http://www.mindspring.com/~scline/payphone/ http://www.att.com/trueconnections/ http://www.fcc.gov/ -SC cc: Telecom Digest [I mean what I say! :) -SC], AT&T 500, FCC-CCB and this will be posted on my web page! -------- end fwd msg ---------- I guess IDT is true sleaze, even worse than the worst COCOT owners -- trying to pull stuff such as this. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! CLLI MRTTGAMA42G NPA 770 ** scline(at)mindspring.net mailto:roamer1(at)pobox.com ** http://www.pobox.com/~roamer1/ From/Reply-To may be changed -- NO SPAM! http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ ------------------------------ From: nwdirect@netcom.com Subject: New Toll-Free Number Coming Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 20:28:36 GMT From Reuters AT&T Corp. said it plans to introduce a new toll-free prefix in one year to meet a growing demand for toll-free services. A year ago, AT&T created an 888 toll-free code to supplement a dwindling supply of 800 numbers. The company said those new numbers are being consumed so quickly that it is working to create another pool of available numbers using an 877 code. "Of 7.78 million available combinations, 7.71 million, or 99.9%, are working, reserved or otherwise taken from the pool of available numbers," AT&T said of the original batch of 800 numbers. The next code, 877, is scheduled to be operational by April 4, 1998. * Internet Access Providers - Web Presence Providers - BBSes * * http://www.thedirectory.org/ - largest directory on the web * * tens of thousands of listings - over 7,600 Access Providers * * Telephone Prefix Locations - "The BBS Corner" - Web Banner Creation * ------------------------------ From: dbryant@netcom.com (David K. Bryant) Subject: Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 00:13:13 GMT Joey Lindstrom writes: > On Mon, 12 May 1997 04:35:03 -0400 (EDT), someone@telecom-digest.org > wrote: >> Reminds of the story I heard, likely in this newsgroup, about the >> woman whose phone number she'd had for many years was similar to a >> brand new large hotel. She'd get many mis-dialed calls for the hotel. >> She tried talking to someone at the hotel but get a rude reception. >> She then started confirming all the room reservations she got. > Similar story here: Years ago, while working at a local taxi dispatch > office, we discovered that our number was very similar to a local > pizza delivery place. Usually on Friday and Saturday nights, we'd get > drunks phoning up asking for a large pepperoni and mushroom, extra > cheese. The funny part was that no matter what you said to these > people, all you'd get out of them would be "how long for my pizza?" > Finally, we just started accepting the pizza order. > Epilogue: some years later, I met up with a fella who, during the time > in question, worked answering phones at the pizza place. And sure > enough, on Friday and Saturday nights, they'd get people phoning 'em > for taxis. And after fighting with them long enough, they too started > taking the taxi orders! :-) Here in the Fremont CA area there is the Take Out Taxi. You place telephone orders with participating restraunts or one of the participating taxi companies. The taxi companies use their slack/idle time to make the delivery. The price difference isn't that much different from the walk-in prices. (They make up the difference in tips I'm sure.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 20:41:58 -0400 From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab In article , Joey Lindstrom writes: > It's amazing how people can place a phone call, and then complete > that call, without actually LISTENING to a single word the other > party says. How you could possibly confuse "Good evening, Checker > Cabs" with "Good evening, Mother's Pizza" is beyond me ... Many phone operators/answerers blurt out the name of the business so routinely that it can be hard to catch. I once worked in the UK for a subsidiary of ICL called ICL Dataskil. The switchboard was manual. I once got a call from a very polite but also very insistent gentleman who insisted that I further pursue the case of rehousing this "old lady who lives in absoluuuutly apaaaahling conditions".) When I conceded that this might all be very sad, he quetioned whether I was indeed Mr. Anderson. I said yes. This happened several times when I seemed unresponsive or at least unacknowleging of the fact that this was an ongoing case with which I was supposed to be familiar. (Anderson is much less common name in England than in the US, due to the paucity of recent Scandinavian immigrants.) Finally, it dawned on me what must have happened. He had called the switchboard, thinking he was dialing some social services agency or whatever, and disregarding the rapidfire blurb "eyecee-eldettuhskillgodMOOORning" had asked for a Mr. Anderson. So I said "this is all very sad, but I believe you have the wrong Anderson, my name is Nils Andersson, and this is EYE --- CEE -- ELL --- DATASKIL, a computer software company." At that point, he went away amicably. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 09:27:23 -0500 From: Ron Kritzman Organization: Kritzman Communications Subject: Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab Joey Lindstrom wrote: > It's amazing how people can place a phone call, and then complete > that call, without actually LISTENING to a single word the other > party says. How you could possibly confuse "Good evening, Checker > Cabs" with "Good evening, Mother's Pizza" is beyond me ... Heh heh. Its amazing, isn't it. Some friends of ours had a phone number similar to that of a popular radio station. Their answering machine even announced "You have reached the home of Mark and Marsha. If you are looking for the radio station, you have misdialed. Their number is NXX-XXXX. To leave a message for Mark or Marsha, please speak at the tone." Sure enough, their messgae tape was always full of song requests. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #126 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 22 00:02:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA04305; Thu, 22 May 1997 00:02:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 00:02:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705220402.AAA04305@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #127 TELECOM Digest Thu, 22 May 97 00:02:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 127 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson SBC To Locate International Headquarters in San Francisco (Mike King) Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone (Joe Plescia) Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone (Randy Miller) Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone (Nils Andersson) Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab (Roger Fajman) Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? (Bill Sohl) Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? (John W. Hall) Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? (Tony Toews) Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Ed Mitchell) Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (jrr0@watson.ibm.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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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 King Subject: SBC To Locate International Headquarters in San Francisco Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 11:30:24 PDT ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 10:19:50 -0700 From: sqlgate@pactel.COM Subject: SBC To Locate International Headquarters in San Francisco FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 19, 1997 FOR MORE INFORMATION: Larry Solomon (210 ) 351-3990 solomon@corp.sbc.com SBC To Locate International Headquarters in San Francisco SAN FRANCISCO -- SBC Communications Inc. today announced it will locate the headquarters of its international operations in San Francisco. The headquarters is one of four the company committed to locate in California as a result of its recent merger with Pacific Telesis. It will oversee SBC's investments in telecommunications companies in Mexico, Chile, France, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, South Africa, South Korea, Israel and Taiwan. "San Francisco is an international city with the right profile and resources to help continue the successful outreach of SBC International Operations," said John H. Atterbury, president and chief executive officer of SBC International Operations. "The city has strong ties to both Latin America and Asia, two key markets for SBC." Last week, SBC announced it had finalized an agreement to form a French company to provide national and international long-distance in France. Also, on May 14 an SBC-led consortium officially completed an agreement to purchase 30 percent of South Africa's national telephone company, which provides local, long-distance and wireless service throughout the country. In addition to France and South Africa, SBC's international investments focus on a wide spectrum of telecommunications services, including wireless, local and long-distance telephone service, as well as video services and directory publishing: SBC owns an approximately 10 percent interest in Telefonos de Mexico, Mexico's national phone company, which provides local, long-distance, wireless and telephone directories. In Chile, SBC holds a 49.3 percent stake in VTR S.A., which offers local, long-distance, cellular and video services throughout the country. In 1995, SBC merged its United Kingdom cable television and telephony operations with TeleWest, creating the largest cable television operator in the U.K. SBC is part of the consortium that designed, built and now operates South Korea's second nationwide digital cellular network, which is adding new subscribers at the rate of 10,000 per month. SBC has investments in companies in Israel which offer international long distance, cable television and telephone directories. In Taiwan, SBC owns 20 percent of the TransAsia Consortium, a cellular company expected to begin providing service in late 1997. "International operations will continue to play a big part in SBC's growth in the years ahead," Atterbury said. "With strategic acquisitions and joint ventures in high-growth territories, SBC is positioned for continued expansion." Atterbury said the company has not yet selected a specific site for the headquarters. In addition to the international operations, SBC also will locate the headquarters of its long distance, Internet and telephone administrative operations in California. SBC Communications Inc. is an international leader in the telecommunications industry, with more than 31 million access lines and 4.7 million wireless customers across the United States, as well as investments in telecommunications businesses in eight countries. Under the Southwestern Bell, Pacific Bell, Nevada Bell and Cellular One brands, the company, through its subsidiaries, offers a wide range of innovative services, including local and long-distance telephone service, wireless communications, paging, Internet access, cable TV and messaging, as well as telecommunications equipment, and directory advertising and publishing. SBC (www.sbc.com) has nearly 110,000 employees. SBC and Pacific Telesis Group reported combined 1996 revenues of $23.5 billion. -------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Joe Plescia Subject: Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone Date: 20 May 1997 17:59:17 GMT Organization: The Plescia Companies Hi all ... Is there a device available that provides dial tone on a cell phone? I have the need for a device that would provide a dial tone to a external device so that a regular telephone or fax machine could be used. I do remember seeing a device, many moons ago at a construction trade show, that connected to a GE 3000 cell phone that allowed regular POTS phones to be used ... (the user picked up the phone, heard a dialtone and dialed) ... Any help or ideas welcome. Thanks, Joe P === NOTICE === return Personal EMAIL TO jplescia@plescia.com === NOTICE === Visit our WWW SITE http://www.plescia.com Joseph P Plescia-Plescia Photo 201.868.0065 201.868.0475fax Photofinishing, Studio, Imaging Paging, Beepers, Cellular Phones ------------------------------ From: Randy Miller Subject: Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 13:59:08 -0400 Organization: Compex Corporation--ODSCOPS Contract Robert S. Hall wrote: > A friend just forwarded this to me. After reading it, I thought you > might be interested in it for one of your editions. There are plenty > of discussions in the Digest about the technology which makes this > person's job possible. Now, for a change, we see things from his > perspective. > (After Surviving 130,000 Calls From The Traveling Public) > By: Jonathan Lee-The Washington Post [Majority of article snipped to save the weary] > Another bunch of people with very thick skins are telephone operators > and directory assistance operators. Ask any operator if she does not > get cussed several times per day and accused of making wrong connections, > charging too much for the call, etc. The American public is difficult > to work with at times. PAT] Pat, Don't forget those of us that had the fortune to work tech support and help desk. Many are the stories I can tell you about working support for a major publisher of microcomputer-based library automation software based in McHenry, IL (who's company name I'll not divulge here because I'm still friendly with most of senior management there, as well as a few that are still working in support since I left in 1991.) D'jawanna (PA dutch slang, for those that ask) talk about a technophobic group of people? Try dealing with public school librarians! While most of them finally caught on to what was going on, there were several who were clueless on where the power switch was on an Apple IIe. Then there were those that hated your entrails because they had a personal computer foisted upon them, and were told to use it or else by their school's administration, never mind that administration was not about to put a phone in the library close to the computer to call support when the needed it, nor were administration going to pay for training. Then, of course there were the eight months of the calendar year I euphamistically called "hell month." Not even the severest hazing in any of the social fraternities at college or university could top August-November and April-July, when the average support person fielded about 60 calls/day (I remember fielding 145 calls in one eight hour period during my tenure in support), and the tempers flowed freely (August-November for the start of school, and April-July for the close of school and inventory of the library). Even tech support at the old WordPerfect Corporation didn't field this many calls per day (of couse, in those days WordPerfect Corp. was abundantly staffed, from what I heard. We were always understaffed in McHenry, no matter what time of year.) Would I do it again? Yes, but on my terms. (Believe me, using a 1-900 number is a great idea for support, ESPCIALLY for those that don't RTFM!) In addition to the job I'm currently working, I run a PC consulting service on the side. A client pays me $100/month and I'll provide service to them for up to 20 hours per month. At least **I** can then determine what is a major fire and what can be left for the weekend ;-). Randy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 20:42:04 -0400 From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone In article , lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) writes: > But in fairness to the general public, today's extremely complex fare > and schedule structures do not make it easy for both the public and > service agents. This applies to airline fares, banking fees, credit > cards, health insurance, and just about everything else that has > centralized 800 numbers serving a very large group of people. Sometimes the craziness is indeed at the service-provider end. While the poor underpaid worker who answers the phone is oftentimes personally not to blame (he was never told, has a flaky computer system, a bizarre company policy designed to confuse etc), the caller is often nevertheless underserved, to put it politely. Examples, in no particular order. 1) I often fly LA-Singapore. There are several routes. Flying United, you can change planes in either Tokyo or Hong Kong. Now, the via Tokyo flight is considered a DIRECT flight, whereas the one through HK is a CONNECTING flight, and you often have to specifically ask them to check the availability of seats on that second route. The mileage is about the same. (What is the difference between a DIRECT flight where you in fact change planes and a CONNECTING flight? Easy. In the former case, both segments have the same FLIGHT NUMBER. Thus, a direct flight enables you to go directly from A to B without changing FLIGHT NUMBER. Ain't it wonderful! You may change planes, plane types and even airlines, several times, the whole thing is a marketing ploy! All airlines use this same terminology, without explaining to the passenger.) 2) I live in Thousand Oaks, CA. The city borders on the city of Westlake Village in the East. WV is in LA County, and TO is in Ventura county. (In Ca, cities may NOT straddle a county line.) The area code (805 in TO, 818 in WV) boundary follows the county line in this area. (There are minor local exceptions, and in other parts further north, chunks of LA County have the 805 area code). Now, the Easternmost couple of miles of TO have Westlake Village mailing addresses. This has no real meaning, as WV and TO use physically the same post office, but apparently WV has more cachet or something. (It is unclear where the dividing line between this elusive slice of TO and "regular" TO actually goes, there is NOT a 5-dig zip code boundary except one perpendicular to the city limit.) Now, if I call 411 (from 805) and ask for a business in TO, they will often not find it if it is in the Westlake Village address area, despite the fact that it is physically in the city of TO, and has an 805 area code. I have to know about this geographic anomaly, and ask them to check Westlake Village. Now they will alert me to that I should check a different area code! GROAN. 3) GTE has a "time" number (+1-805-495 1811), which gives time, or so they claim. Trouble is, for all of this year, it has been about 7 seconds off, it is to "slow". I have spent LITERALLY HOURS trying to find somebody at GTE who can fix this. At the best of times, I am given a runaround. At worst, I am told that it is I who do not know what time it is. (Suggesting the US Naval observatory +1-202-762 1401 does not seem to help, despite the fact that they are legally by definition correct in any US jurisdiction.) The battle goes on. Regards, Nils Andersson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Greyhound has the same sort of ambiguities in their system timetables which frequently cause confusion to the bus- riding public. At their national telephone information center in Omaha, the clerks punch in certain variables provided to them by the caller and the computer displays schedules and pricing information based on traveling *exclusively* by Greyhound or one of the several other bus companies which pay Greyhound to be included in its timetables. This same computer system is used to provide information and print bus tickets in the company-owned terminals. It will also provide information regards schedules at the 80-85 percent of the bus stations which are privately owned and operated as commission agencies (versus the 15 percent or so of Greyhound facilities which are actually operated by Greyhound and the 5 percent or so which are jointly owned by Greyhound and others) but -- and here is where the confusion comes in -- the private comm- ission agents are allowed by law, and it is to their financial advan- tage to do so, to sell tickets for any bus line listed as 'interline' with Greyhound. They assuredly will quote on the telephone the prices and schedules of any bus line operating through their station, whether it is Greyhound or not. Let me quote my friend here in Skokie: "Customer dials local number and asks for afternoon schedule to Madison, Wisconsin. He is told bus leaves at 5:10 pm and reaches Madison at 9:30 pm. Customer then calls the Greyhound 800 number, asks the same question and is told bus leaves at 5:30 pm and reaches Madison at 1:05 am." (Continuing in his words) "He then called me back four or five times to argue and argue saying I could not possibly be correct since 'the 800 number' told him otherwise, and they would have to be correct since they are on computer." ... "Then he would call Greyhound and argue with them about what I said, pitting one of us against the other. "We both gave him the same price of sixteen dollars for the trip, and I finally decided to be very elaborate in explaining to him what was going on. I would have sent him north to Milwaukee on the 5:10 bus and had him transfer to the Badger Bus Line which is across the street from Greyhound in Milwaukee. He would have left there at 8:00 pm and been in Madison an hour and a half later at the station in Madison where Greyhound and Badger jointly operate. But Greyhound, you see, rather than quote Badger service would rather have the customer go south to Chicago and sit in the Chicago terminal three hours until 9:30 pm then go north on the Seattle-bound bus which happens to go via Milwaukee to Madison where it arrives at 1:05 am. I told the customer finally to suit himself; to go either way he wanted." (customer says) "Badger? You mean Badger comes through your station there in Skokie? Well why didn't Greyhound tell me that?" (Jim again) "Badger does not come through here, but we sell them all the time out of Milwaukee. You call Greyhound, they are going to quote their own schedules and those of their affiliates. We sell Greyhound here, and a couple dozen other bus lines as well which Greyhound does not quote. Although the only one actually in this station is Greyhound, in Madison, Wisconsin Badger owns the facility and Greyhound passes through a few times per day. The agent there sells both, the same as we do. Greyhound would rather keep all the revenue for themselves even if you have to sit in Chicago for three hours to wait for their bus to ride on. I would rather see customer convenience even if Badger gets part of the ticket. Unless a customer indicates a *specific* bus line he wants to use, most agents will sell on the *next* bus to the customer's destination regardless of which company it is." The *next* bus is the 5:10 pm to Milwaukee. If you miss that one, the one which follows is the 5:30 pm bus to Chicago. Either one will get you to Madison sir. Take your choice. The same fare applies either way: sixteen dollars; the only difference is on the first one the ticket will have a 'coupon tear' for Badger. Thank you for calling and I have to move on to my next call of three presently waiting on hold." PAT] ------------------------------ From: Roger Fajman Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 01:46:10 EDT Subject: Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab > It's amazing how people can place a phone call, and then complete > that call, without actually LISTENING to a single word the other > party says. How you could possibly confuse "Good evening, Checker > Cabs" with "Good evening, Mother's Pizza" is beyond me ... Well, there's no excuse for not listening to what the person on the other end says -- if you can understand it. I've noticed a number of times that when I call someone that the first few words I hear from the other end seem garbled. These are usually the ones giving the name of the business that I have reached, so I have to ask if I have reached the right place. Does anyone know how long it takes after the line goes off-hook before a clear signal can be passed? I wonder if people wearing headsets might not start speaking too soon. ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 17:29:30 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) wrote: > Michael Wright (voe@telalink.net) writes: >> There is no research out there that has established ANY causal >> relationship between cell phones and brain tumors. > Complete utter balderdash. Apparently this correspondent can't read. Please point us (me) to the specific study or studies that hae made such a conclusion. Additional comments deleted for brevity. > And a number of studies have show an increase in problems with ham radio > operators, military radio operators, military radar operators, police radar > operators, merchant marine radio operators, diathermy opeators, plastic > welding operators -- and a few other, I can't remember, off hand. I have never seen any such references or conclusions made in relation to ham radio operators (I am a ham), or most of these other jobs and occupations. Without specific references, your comments are hearsay at best and without substantiation at all. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: hallj@cadvision.com (John W Hall) Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 20:40:34 GMT Organization: Digital Magic Reply-To: Digital.Magic@cadvision.com fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) wrote: > I would suggest that perhaps the > invoice square law <<<<<<<< At first I thought this was an error, but since you're a technical writer of course it isn't. I suppose the amout owing doubles each month until paid? John Hall / Digital Magic "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (Arthur C. Clarke) ------------------------------ From: ttoews@telusplanet.net (Tony Toews) Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 01:21:33 GMT Organization: TELUS Communications Inc. fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) wrote: > I would suggest that perhaps the invoice square law may be a factor > here - Ummm, would that be the inverse square law? Tony Toews, Independent Computer Consultant The Year 2000 crisis: Will my parents or your grand parents still be receiving their pension in January, 2000? See www.granite.ab.ca/year2000 for more info. Microsoft Access Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm ------------------------------ From: Ed Mitchell Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 14:19:32 -0700 voe@telalink.net (Michael Wright) wrote in reply to Bemson : > A cell phone operates with a transmitter power of only 3/4 of > a watt. As you read this, you are sitting in a far more powerful > electromagnetic field, the one generated by your computer monitor. Actually, conventional cellular phones dynamically adjust power levels from a low of about 40 milliwatts up to 0.6 watts. The cellular base station always tries to keep your phone operating at the lowest power level to reduce interference potential to other phones and to extend your battery life. > As to cordless phones, they operate with a transmitter power of 100 > milliwatts (one-tenth of a watt) so they, too, constitute no hazard > whatsoever ... at least from the magnetic field. This too is incorrect. Almost all cordless phones in the U.S. operate under Part 15 rules limiting their output to about 0.7 milliwatts. Spread spectrum phones (e.g. digital 900 Mhz phones) often operate at about 10 mw and very few phones go as high as 100 mw. Second, most consumer cordless phones in the U.S. operate at 46/49 MHz - a wavelength of over 18 feet. You can't compare the human absorption of 0.7 mw RF at 46 MHz with 0.7 mw at 902-928 MHz. You are likely to encounter much stronger electro-magnetic fields from ordinary household wiring, anything with an AC power transformer, or your computer display. There are a great many variables in calculating the effects of RF, if any, on humans. There does not appear to be any epidemic associated with either class of phones, or radio stations. The overwhelmingly largest cause of death of modern humans are cardiovascular disease, lung disease, vehicle accidents and cancer caused by how you choose to lead your life - not "bogey man" of modern technology out to kill you. Ed Mitchell, KF7VY, publisher, Ham Radio Online Visit Ham Radio Online, read in 67 countries at http://www.hamradio-online.com Email vbook@vbook.com ------------------------------ From: jrr0@watson.ibm.com Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Date: 18 May 1997 19:26:46 GMT Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Reply-To: jrr0@watson.ibm.com In , Joel Upchurch writes: > I wonder how much it would effect the range of a cell phone to move > the antenna to the bottom of the phone? It seems to me that this > would reduce any effects of the phones transmissions on the brain by > at least an order of magnitude. The trouble is that some lawyer would > use any design change as an admission that the previous design was > unsafe. Of course, even if they do cause an occasional brain tumor > the health risks are down in the noise compared cell phone related > automobile >accidents :-). Of course, if the antenna were at the bottom, it would be blamed for causing some other medical malady. I detect that many of these studies don't really investigate the parameter that should be of interest -- the electric field strength inside the heat, caused by the transmitter. That's a very tough measurement to do, for obvious reasons. It's like the power line study which claimed to show correlation between power lines and certain diseases -- but *nobody* was actually going into the houses and measuring field strength. All the study did was see how far the house was from the line. The correlations went away when the actual electric field measurements were done. But the correlation that still did stand out was that the folks who lived near the power lines had much lower than average incomes. So all that money was spent on proving: Poor folks get sick more often than rich folks. Folks have to have *something* to blame for their ills. Cell phones might as well be it ... Jim ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #127 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 22 00:35:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA06298; Thu, 22 May 1997 00:35:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 00:35:13 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705220435.AAA06298@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #128 TELECOM Digest Thu, 22 May 97 00:35:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 128 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Book Review: "ISDN for Dummies" by Angell (David Richards) ISDN U Interface Wiring/Electrical Interface in Apartment (Eric Ewanco) Re: Net2Phone Worse than a COCOT! (John Cropper) Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming (John Cropper) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (P. Morgan) Re: Survey Says Almost All Americans Want to Censor the Net (Lou Coles) Re: Audio Monitoring When Phone is On Hook (Peter Corlett) Legal Recourse Against Spammers (Stan Brown) Congressman Wants to Ban Spam (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: dr@ripco.com (David Richards) Subject: Re: Book Review: "ISDN for Dummies" by Angell Date: 22 May 1997 02:52:27 GMT Organization: Ripco Communications Inc. In article , Rob Slade wrote: > In chapter two, we are told the PRI (Primary Rate Interface, the large > economy size of ISDN) is beyond the scope of the book. Fair enough, > on a practical level, although conceptually rather odd. BRI (Basic > Rate Interface) is what most home or small office users will want. > But then why does Appendix B give us over forty pages of detail on > ISDN wiring and power guidelines? What's funny is that aside from wiring and power guidelines, PRI isn't very different from BRI. Perhaps the appendix is there just to make the book thicker. > This inconsistency of level is unfortunately typical of the book. The > introductory section explaining ISDN and its benefits is vague and > undependable. (Or even self-contradictory: we are told in one place > that ISDN lines are $15 a month, and fifteen pages later they are $50 > a month.) Yet chapters three and four, on the basic requirements for > service, equipment, and setup, are very good. Much of chapters five > through sixteen simply describe specific products. As usual, the > later chapters give company contact information. ISDN line charges vary widely from area to area -- $15-$50 is about the right range. The "benefits" and specific services included with ISDN is very different in different areas of the USA, and the USA as a whole is nothing like Europe. > Probably useful, but not altogether reliable. "ISDN for Dummies" is the kind of book that is worth reading once, but would be embarassing to have in your bookcase. David Richards Ripco, since Nineteen-Eighty-Three My opinions are my own, IRS withstanding Public Access in Chicago Proud to be the 5,000th least-important Shell/SLIP/PPP/UUCP/ISDN/Leased usenet-abuser, by the unofficial GSUA. (773) 665-0065 !Free Usenet/E-Mail! ------------------------------ From: Eric James Ewanco Subject: ISDN U Interface Wiring/Electrical Interface (High Rise Apartment) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 21:34:44 -0400 Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Summary: I need some assistance in doing the inside wiring for my new ISDN line which has just been almost fully installed) in a situation which is more complex than usual. Out of five unwired pairs of wires in my apartment junction box one pair (green/white-green) has 50.8 volts on it and I want to determine out if this is the correct pair. Details: I have placed an order for NYNEX ISDN. The telco tech made a surprise visit today to do inside premises wiring, and I was not home. He claimed in a note he needed access to the premises; I was surprised because I told them I would do my own inside wiring (and the apartment manager could have let him in). According to the apartment management he did everything but the inside wiring. I looked at the RJ-45 interface and saw why he might have sought access. I live in a high-rise apartment complex, and in my junction box there are six pairs of wires that come in the top and exit the bottom: blue/white-blue, orange/white-orange, green/white-green, brown/white-brown, red-blue/blue-red, and grey/white-grey. Only one pair was wired to the RJ-45, the blue pair to the red and green. One of the other five pairs was probably my ISDN line but who knows which. Two of the pairs were exposed (spliced?) The orange pair had a white crimp connector on each wire. The green pair was simply stripped. I attached a voltmeter to both (in the case of the orange it was more difficult but I am confident I made contact); the green pair had 50.8v on it. (I had only one line up to this point.) My POTS line had around 49v to it (on-hook). According to , this is either T568A color coding or T568B color coding. This document gives the typical mapping between the weird striped wires and the more typical quad cable (green, red, black, yellow, and in some white and blue). The white-green/green pair is assigned to "pair 3" which is white and blue; white-orange/orange is assigned to black and yellow (typically a second line). Also according to this document (and a previous post in comp.dcom.isdn) the U interface is not polarity sensitive so I don't have to worry there. So I think I've found the line. (I haven't checked the other three pairs because they are not stripped.) Can I be certain about this, or must I pay NYNEX big bucks to connect two wires? Does the voltage seem like ISDN voltage, or is it different enough from POTS to be distinguishable? Could I have found another apartment's phone line? (Seems doubtful; that's a security issue.) Obviously I cannot plug a POTS device into it because if it is "correct" it will likely damage my POTS device. It would be probably also imprudent to simply attach an ISDN device for similar reasons (I saw archived some discussion about problems here) but the point, now, is moot; I haven't received my TA yet so I have no ISDN equipment. Maybe a pot and a speaker. I have no oscilloscope, either (though perhaps I could borrow one). I'm going to try to contact the technician but he may not cooperate with me. Thanks, Eric Ewanco eje@world.std.com http://www.wp.com/Eric_Ewanco Framingham, MA ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: Net2Phone Worse than a COCOT! Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 22:33:07 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises Stanley Cline wrote: > Just because I had nothing to do, I downloaded IDT's Net2Phone > software (which allows calls to any *phone* over the internet.) They > say to try calling any 800/888 number "for free", so I was going to > try calling my own AT&T 500 number (via 1-800-CALL-ATT.) Guess what > -- it didn't work! > For some f***ing reason IDT has seen fit to BLOCK the Big Three's 800 > calling-card/collect/500 access numbers! Yet they say *any* 800/888 > number will work. Strangely enough, other MCI access numbers, and the > access numbers for other, smaller calling card providers [which I will > NOT disclose in the Digest, nor to IDT] were NOT blocked and went > through fine. The big joke is that IDT buys time on the same network as needed, just like everyone else ... why they block certain numbers is obviously something THEY will have to explain. > (This is horribly reminiscent of f***ing COCOTs, specifically some I > have repeatedly warned the FCC and Georgia PSC about -- that block ALL > 888 numbers PLUS CERTAIN 800 numbers. One calling card company, whose > 800 and 888 access numbers have been blocked by "The Right Stuff"'s > payphones, told me they're sending them a cease-and-desist order!) Yes, but the $64 question is: Does this form of communication fall under regulation? > I guess IDT is true sleaze, even worse than the worst COCOT owners -- > trying to pull stuff such as this. They run the same "plans", as the big three (with some minor variations in international rates), and a "bonus" if you use them as your primary ISP ... I didn't see any reference to them in DLD, though ... John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 http://www.lincs.net/ The latest compiled area code information is available from us! NPAs, NXXs, Dates, all at http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 22:38:32 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises nwdirect@netcom.com wrote: > From Reuters > AT&T Corp. said it plans to introduce a new toll-free prefix in one > year to meet a growing demand for toll-free services. A year ago, AT&T > created an 888 toll-free code to supplement a dwindling supply of 800 > numbers. The company said those new numbers are being consumed so > quickly that it is working to create another pool of available numbers > using an 877 code. "Of 7.78 million available combinations, 7.71 > million, or 99.9%, are working, reserved or otherwise taken from the > pool of available numbers," AT&T said of the original batch of 800 > numbers. The next code, 877, is scheduled to be operational by April > 4, 1998. AT&T had very little to do in designating NPA 877 for domestic toll-free use (aside from the obvious wholesale consumption of available 800/888 resources), but does manage to twist a good story to Reuters! Wouldn't you agree, Pat? John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 http://www.lincs.net/ The latest compiled area code information is available from us! NPAs, NXXs, Dates, all at http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I read it, my first reaction was that AT&T had nothing at all to do with the creation of 877. But then, it may have been Reuters which made that leap to AT&T as creator based on some interview with the company otherwise. I really cannot imagine AT&T making that claim. PAT] ------------------------------ From: P Morgan Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 07:56:33 +0100 In message jfmezei wrote: > Furthermore, one must question how much it costs to rent a telephone > without service vs renting one with a local service package. Not all > rental shops at airports may be willing to rent you a telephone > without a sim card (service). Perhaps this will change, or perhaps > this is only isolated cases in certain countries. From the UK ... With so many of the phones being tied to a particular network, and the GSM networks here operating on two separate frequency allocations (900 MHz for Cellnet + Vodafone, 1800 MHz for Orange and one2one) I doubt that many non-UK SIM cards would work ... and you'd find the UK network operator has no agreement with your home SIM card issuer. The networks, as well as being on different frequencies, have had some different target users -- the lower freq ones offer more international roaming, and were originally offering only analogue calls at a time when a mobile phone was a businessman's perk or a yuppie gimmick. The higher freq aimed more at personal use, and have included airtime since day one (the lower freq charged for all calls originally). The higher freq also allow 0800/0500 (ie free calls) to be made free, but the lower freq networks still charge even for these calls. [ An exception is for calls to use a telephone card access number, as the mobile networks want the income from the international calls, and not the likes of AT&T, WorldCom, etc to get your call "free". ] Peter Morgan ------------------------------ From: loujon69@delphi.com (Lou Coles) Subject: Re: Survey Says Almost All Americans Want to Censor the Net Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 18:40:01 GMT Declan McCullagh said: > [Of course, I'd like to see another question asked: Do you think a Bible > Belt prosecutor should be able to threaten you with a prison sentence and a > $250,000 fine if you post offensive material on your web site? --Declan] Good point. > In a recent nationwide telephone survey of a random sample of > Americans ages 18 and older conducted by Chilton Research Services, 80 > percent of respondents answered "Yes" when asked, "Do you think that > the government should take steps to control access to pornographic or > sexually explicit material on the Internet to protect children and > teens under 18 years of age?" I'm sorry, but the question more or less insures a "Yes". I wonder what the response would have been to the subject, that is "Do you want the government to censor the Internet?" -Lou- ------------------------------ From: Peter Corlett Subject: Re: Audio Monitoring When Phone is On Hook Date: 20 May 1997 17:52:24 +0100 Organization: Metamedia (BABT is a large bureaucracy which is supposed to approve devices for connection to British Telecom's networks. If something is not approved, it is supposedly illegal to connect it. Approved equipment always has a green circle logo, unapproved equipment occasionally has a red triangle. It is very expensive to gain BABT approval, and so a lot of perfectly safe equipment is unapproved. These days, it would also appear that due to European law, just carrying a CE mark is sufficient, and usually a lot cheaper. Whilst interesting, CE marks are beyond the scope of this posting.) I'd be somewhat concerned if anybody actually tried the suggestion of the Moderator to just connect an amplified speaker directly to a telephone line without isolation. At least for British Telecom lines, there are dangerous voltages present, especially when the line is ringing, and there is little or no equipment loading the line. It's probably "safe enough" when not ringing, but how can you guarantee you won't be called? I recall being told by a friend about when he was working directly on his phone line, and was quite happily going about his business when his "assistant" dialled 175, a line diagnostic test, which happens to put funny voltages on the line to test the equipment, and then calls back with the result. What was said by my friend was most certainly unprintable. I've also found that directly connected circuits suffer from mains hum. I bought a telephone line recorder adaptor from Maplin (an electronics store), complete with BABT red triangle. When I plugged it in, I got a horrendous 50Hz buzz, with a faint hint of dialtone in the background. I opened the thing up to find a single resistor and two inadequate capacitors. I use one of two circuits, depending on application, to connect to the PSTN. They both employ a 600:600 ohm transformer, and I have a small cache of BABT approved units for this purpose. For a device that acts like a telephone, I connect the transformer, in series with a 600 ohm resistor, across the line. The other side of the transformer gives isolated audio - you can record off the line, or play into the line, or both at this point, or even connect it to another phone line as a divertor. The 600R is not absolutely required, it just allows extensions on the line to work. You would usually have a relay or switch on the line too, to be able to hang up. If you use a 6k resistor instead of a 600R one, you can not only monitor extensions, but you can also listen to the exchange when on-hook. British Telecom lines seem to have a quiet 1Hz click when idle, and on an incoming call, it gets a lot more active. If you have Caller Display, you will get various tones, followed by a blast of FSK, and finally, a 20Hz buzz, which is the ringing. In the USA, the sequence will be different. If you merely wish to record a telephone conversation, the circuit can be simplified by substituting a telephone for the 600R resistor. It would appear, however that if you use a tape recorder with a high-impedence input, and poor RF rejection, you will sometimes pick up your favourite radio station too. Although I quite like listening to Radio 4, I can't say I'm too happy at listening to it on the telephone ... \/ Peter Corlett, Birmingham, England Finally dumped Demon, went to DirCon http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~strowger/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Moderator did not say to just attach an amplified speaker to the line without isolation. I think what I said was to add a little something to the line, i.e. capacitors and/or resistors so that the central office would not detect you being there, nor would the spied-upon subscriber. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 00:17:53 EDT From: stbrown@nacs.net (Stan Brown) In TELECOM Digest 17:124, our Esteemed Moderator wrote: > The time has come for the community to begin taking a very agressive > stance on spam. We need to begin demanding that there be enforcement > of the laws and at the same time use our own attornies to begin > litigation. PAT] I agree with PAT's sentiments. However, before laws can be enforced they must be passed. The preponderance of legal opinion on the Net is that the current law does not cover junk emails or Usenet spam. There have been claims (notably in misc.legal.moderated, which I read, and its unmoderated brethren, which I don't read) to stretch the Telephone Consumer Protection Act's prohibition of junk fax to junk email. But the better-reasoned opinions published there have shown that such attempts are not adequate. (I have no formal legal training. But the "not covered" arguments seem more self consistent to me, and the "is covered" arguments seem to rely more on rhetoric and wishful thinking. Ultimately, what matters is a court decision; but none has yet been handed down. In fact, as far as I know there has never been a junk-email court case relying on the TCPA's junk-fax provisions.) One easy argument: the TCPA requires that any fax transmission include the phone number of the sending machine. If junk email is to fall into the junk-fax category based on the TCPA, then every email is subject to that requirement. Since hardly any emails include the sender's phone number, that would make virtually all present-day emails illegal, an absurd result. You can read further details in Mark Eckenwiler's article at http://www.panix.com/~eck/junkmail.html I agree that email spam is execrable, and I think it does great harm to the Net. But before the Federal government can get involved, legislation is needed to make junk emails illegal. I think the prospects for such legislation are fairly good, because the junk emailers are nowhere near as well organized (yet) as the junk snail-mailers. But all of us who hate spam and complain about it need to put a modicum of that energy into writing to our representatives in our respective national capitals to demand legislation. (A problem left as an exercise for the reader is what to do about offshore spam-mailers.) Another approach, one that does not require legislation, is to use the law of contracts and/or the law of torts. Civil actions are initiated by private parties and need not wait for the government to act. I'm not a lawyer, but I would think suits for the tort of denial of service might have a fair shot. The law of contracts would come in if all of us would offer a high-priced service, acceptance of which was indicated by the sending of junk email. (See my signature line for an example. No, I've not yet collected a cent that way.) I could see some smart attorneys (*) filing a class action against AGIS, Earthlink, and other spam-friendly ISPs. (*) The plural is "attorneys" not "attornies", PAT, for the same reason that it's "turkeys" not "turkies". See the American Heritage Dictionary, third edition, or Fowler's Modern English Usage at "plural anomalies". Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems Cleveland, Ohio mailto:stanbrown@geocities.com USA http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1791/ USD500.00 charge for proofreading unsolicited commercial emails. ------------------------------ Subject: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 19:51:12 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) U.S. congressman wants ban on junk e-mail "spam" WASHINGTON (Reuter) - A U.S. congressman Wednesday proposed a ban on "spam", unsolicited junk electronic mail that he said was clogging up the online baskets of internet users across the country. New Jersey Republican Chris Smith said his "Netizens Protection Act of 1997" would ban unsolicited commercial e-mail including get-rich-quick schemes, unproven medical remedies and similar solicitations that can cost recipients money by incurring online charges. "This bill will help people not only with the nuisance of spam but the costs as well," Smith said. He said that anyone who chose to get the "spam" could still do so under his bill, which would in effect be an extension of the 1991 Telephone Consumer Protection Act banning unsolicited junk faxes. The bill would not affect e-mail sent by friends and existing business associates. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #128 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 23 01:54:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA10274; Fri, 23 May 1997 01:54:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 01:54:16 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705230554.BAA10274@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #129 TELECOM Digest Fri, 23 May 97 01:54:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 129 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (William H. Bowen) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (J. DeBert) Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam (William H. Bowen) Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam (Diablo Cat) Alert: Two Anti-Spam Bills in Congress; One Good, One Bad (John R. Levine) 800 Number/Spam (Steven Lichter) Netizens Protection Act of 1997 (Ed Ellers) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: bowenb@best.com (William H. Bowen) Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 05:42:34 GMT Reply-To: bowenb@best.com stbrown@nacs.net (Stan Brown) wrote: > In TELECOM Digest 17:124, our Esteemed Moderator wrote: >> The time has come for the community to begin taking a very agressive >> stance on spam. We need to begin demanding that there be enforcement >> of the laws and at the same time use our own attornies to begin >> litigation. PAT] > I agree with PAT's sentiments. However, before laws can be enforced > they must be passed. See below: a bill was introduced into the U.S. Senate today (5/21) Senator Murkowski of Alaska just today introduced a bill (S771) into the US Senate to control spam. Below is a post the Senator placed in news.admin.net-abuse.email: ------------ Knowing of this newsgroup's major interest in the issue of unsolicited commercial e-mail, also known as junk e-mail and spam, I thought you might be interested in legislation that I introduced this morning in the >United States Senate. The full text of the bill, a brief outline, and my >introductory statement are available online at http://www.senate.gov/~murkowski/commercialemail I am strongly encouraging comments on this bill from interested parties so I would welcome comments and suggestions to this email address. commercialemail@murkowski.senate.gov Frank H. Murkowski United States Senate ============ End of Quoted Post ======================== I've read the bill, and it looks pretty good. I've got a few ideas for some changes (mostly some detail stuff) but basically it looks good. It does NOT ban spam (so no 1st Amendment problems), but does mandate truth in routing info (no spoofed addresses, etc) and also mandates that the first word in the Subject line be the word "advertisement" so promail filtering would be MUCH easier. It also mandates that the name, address and phone number of the actual sender be in the spam message itself. Anyway, instead of me recounting the whole thing, check out the Senator's web site, and, if you like it, contact John Glenn and Mike DeWine and ask them to co-sponsor it. The bill isn't perfect, but it sure is a GIANT step in the right direction. Regards, Bill Bowen bowenb@best.com> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would suggest they could probably ban spam without any real First Amendment problems since what is termed 'commercial speech' has never had the same protection as 'political speech'. Anyway, those First Amendment excuses are just a crock as far as I am concerned. Every charlatan in America today should get on his knees and praise God for the First Amendment; it is all that stands between most of them and a jail term. I get sick of all the bum excuses I hear in a day's time which invoke the First Amendment. PAT] ------------------------------ From: J. DeBert Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:18:15 -0700 Organization: hypatia.com Stan Brown wrote: > In TELECOM Digest 17:124, our Esteemed Moderator wrote: >> The time has come for the community to begin taking a very agressive >> stance on spam. We need to begin demanding that there be enforcement >> of the laws and at the same time use our own attornies to begin >> litigation. PAT] > I agree with PAT's sentiments. However, before laws can be enforced > they must be passed. The preponderance of legal opinion on the Net is > that the current law does not cover junk emails or Usenet spam. As reported elsewhere in comp.dcom.telecom and others, there is at least a draft of legislation to modify 47usc227 to ban junk email which is being justified by costs incurred by the recipient. I foresee problems with this as it stands. But if you want more law, what are you willing to give up? Would you allow unconditional monitoring of mail that you send and receive? Would you allow monitoring and tracking of newsgroups you read? Would you agree to a ban on encrypting mail, etc.? Would you allow government access (without a warrant and without probable cause) to your computer systems? Quid pro quo -- what will you trade in exchange for protection against junk mail, spam, fraud, etc.? I would love to see legislation explicitly prohibiting everything that is already banned in the real world. I especially would like to see the spammers and other perpetrators of fraud prosecuted, jailed and penniless. But I do not want to yield one bit on my liberties, on or off the net. I've been on the net since it was arpanet, when DARPA was "running the show". I've seen it change, lately for the worse... But that's enough lament -- I could go on for at least several Kb more. > There have been claims (notably in misc.legal.moderated, which I read, > and its unmoderated brethren, which I don't read) to stretch the > Telephone Consumer Protection Act's prohibition of junk fax to junk > email. But the better-reasoned opinions published there have shown > that such attempts are not adequate. 47usc227 discourages all but the most blatant and bold. What is required is to test it in a court case. Though the law seems to clearly include most computer systems, the intended definition was only to include facsimile machines. So a test case is necessary. > (I have no formal legal training. But the "not covered" arguments seem > more self consistent to me, and the "is covered" arguments seem to > rely more on rhetoric and wishful thinking. Ultimately, what matters > is a court decision; but none has yet been handed down. In fact, as > far as I know there has never been a junk-email court case relying on > the TCPA's junk-fax provisions.) > One easy argument: the TCPA requires that any fax transmission include > the phone number of the sending machine. If junk email is to fall into > the junk-fax category based on the TCPA, then every email is subject > to that requirement. Since hardly any emails include the sender's > phone number, that would make virtually all present-day emails > illegal, an absurd result. If a TCPA junk email case is successful in court, then the station ID requirements also become effective and enforceable. That means that everyone must include in their email, news posting, etc., at least their modem phone number. (There's that quid pro quo thing starting to show up!) > You can read further details in Mark Eckenwiler's article at > http://www.panix.com/~eck/junkmail.html > I agree that email spam is execrable, and I think it does great > harm to the Net. But before the Federal government can get involved, > legislation is needed to make junk emails illegal. I think the > prospects for such legislation are fairly good, because the junk > emailers are nowhere near as well organized (yet) as the junk > snail-mailers. But all of us who hate spam and complain about it need > to put a modicum of that energy into writing to our representatives in > our respective national capitals to demand legislation. (A problem > left as an exercise for the reader is what to do about offshore > spam-mailers.) You might not believe the magnitude of the problem junk emailers (aka spammers) cause! They cause serious problems for ISP's, who must work hard to protect their systems against crashing due to floods of junk mail, redesign mailers to prevent use as relays or for other fraudulent purposes, plug holes in systems to prevent these intruders from using other means to perpetrate their fraud, etc. Many ISP customers must pay for online time, time to download (via pop, etc.) mail, pay for exceeding their disk space or even mailbox(!) quotas, through no fault of their own. Some users lose mail received and/or unread or files when the system clears space to deliver new mail, so junk mail can cause people to lose important stuff, too. Spam and junk mail has done immense harm. It still does and will do even more. The consequences are going to cost everyone a lot -- except the spammers, of course -- and not just in terms of money. > Another approach, one that does not require legislation, is to use the > law of contracts and/or the law of torts. Civil actions are initiated > by private parties and need not wait for the government to act. I'm > not a lawyer, but I would think suits for the tort of denial of > service might have a fair shot. The law of contracts would come in if > all of us would offer a high-priced service, acceptance of which was > indicated by the sending of junk email. (See my signature line for an > example. No, I've not yet collected a cent that way.) I could see some > smart attorneys (*) filing a class action against AGIS, Earthlink, and > other spam-friendly ISPs. Existing law might work well. Spammers steal services and use fraud to further their activities. They use someone else's systems to send mail and post news, falsify headers and obtain accounts to use to perpetrate their fraud and evade everyone who complains or wishes to be removed from their lists. There has been a long standing agreement among ISP's and users alike that no one may use another's system without permission. At the very least, spammers are guilty of breach of contract, every time they use another's system to relay mail, whether they connect to it directly or indirectly. They cause damage to reputations of companies and individuals using such means by leading people to believe that the company condones spam or that the indvidual user is responsible by their act of falsifying headers. In some states, such acts are felonies or can be prosecuted in civil court under defamation laws. In some instances, they are also against federal laws under the ECPA. Some spammer activities, including the chain letters, pyramid and Ponzi schemes that flood newsgroups almost daily are prosecutable under federal criminal codes and postal regulations. People doing such things before NSF opened up commercial exploitation of the internet would be flamed, ostracized and even banned from internet access for years. One notable incident that I recall was a spammer who also send dozens of mail messages for a pyramid scheme from his university account. Responding to flames, he proclaimed his "Consititutional rights" and was quickly banned from computer access. He violated the ban and was expelled. (I would not be surprised if that was Spamford himself.) Though he threatened to sue, he just quietly disappeared. In addition to contract law, one may prosecute anyone who uses their systems without permission, including for mail relay or using an account contrary to the terms and conditions of service. But even these things must be tested by a court, even if you can get a district attorney or U.S. attorney to at least take a look at the matter. Unfortunately, for the vast majority (if not all) of prosecutors, this kind of thing is way over their heads. They would need a lot of hand-holding to get through such cases. (I'd rather file a civil case, personally, as most DA's and USA's don't really seem competent enough or qualified, let alone motivated to prosecute such cases.) Spammers and others whine about the "right to free speech" on the net. There is no right to free speech on the net, there never has been. It has been upheld in a court of law and by "stare decisis" in other courts of law. Some such cases have been thrown out of court before ever being heard. (If anyone has records or info about these cases, I hope they will share them with the group! I never kept the info. Some were posted in several newsgroups years ago, during the ARPAnet & NSFnet years and afterward.) Perhaps one might somehow induce a spammer to try to take their whinings to federal court so that he can get his dose of cold hard reality? onymouse@hypatia.com SPAM/Unsolicited commercial email is an unwanted expense. I think I should pass on the expense to the ones who imposed it on me and put an end their free ride in my pocketbook. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You ask what would I be willing to trade off to get rid of spam ... why should I have to trade anything? Simply clarify and/or adjust the current law to include computers in the existing prohibitions which apply to fax machines. Then when that law is adjusted/modified and you get spam in your mailbox you turn it over to the appropriate government bureaucrat with a request that when they have some personnel to spare -- maybe they could take someone who is searching Ted K's little shed in Montana looking for more typewriters, or maybe they could spare someone who works at the kiddie porn mail order operation the FBI operates in Florida -- they go out and give some grief to the sender of the spam. Why should I have to give up anything to get that little bit done? Simply ban it from being sent unsolicited as is done with faxes now. What did the owners of fax machines have to trade off in order to get some pro- tection? PAT] ------------------------------ From: bowenb@best.com (William H. Bowen) Subject: Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 05:51:49 GMT Reply-To: bowenb@best.com tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) wrote: > U.S. congressman wants ban on junk e-mail "spam" > WASHINGTON (Reuter) - A U.S. congressman Wednesday proposed a ban on > "spam", unsolicited junk electronic mail that he said was clogging up > the online baskets of internet users across the country. > New Jersey Republican Chris Smith said his "Netizens Protection Act of > 1997" would ban unsolicited commercial e-mail including get-rich-quick > schemes, unproven medical remedies and similar solicitations that can > cost recipients money by incurring online charges. > "This bill will help people not only with the nuisance of spam but the > costs as well," Smith said. > He said that anyone who chose to get the "spam" could still do so under > his bill, which would in effect be an extension of the 1991 Telephone > Consumer Protection Act banning unsolicited junk faxes. > The bill would not affect e-mail sent by friends and existing business > associates. Tad, Senator Murkowski introduced a bill today into the Senate (S771) for the same purpose. Check out his bill at his web site http://www.senate.gov/~murkowski I read the bill and it looks pretty good. The Senator's bill does not go the same way as the junk fax bill (banning it, which would most assuradly bring a 1st Amendment challange from the ACLU) but forces spammers to have their name, address and phone number in the body of the message, to use correct routing info (no "spoofed addresses) and mandate that the first word in the SUNJECT line be the word "advertisement", which would allow promail and other filter programs an easy way to identify spam and kill it, if desired. Anyway, go take a look at the bill, and, if it looks good to you, call your two Senators and get them to co-sponsor it! Regards, Bill Bowen bowenb@best.com P.S. Senator Murkowski has even provided a special link on his web site for emailed comments about the bill. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone should start sending aclu.org about six million bytes of junk mail daily. I wonder if they have ever seen what it looks like? Probably not; they have a bad habit of mouthing off about stuff they know nothing about. PAT] ------------------------------ From: brianm@ricochet.net (Diablo Cat) Subject: Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 16:57:10 GMT Organization: Ever herd cats? On 22 May 1997 12:57:52 GMT, "Bruce Pennypacker" wrote: > Tad Cook wrote in article org>... >> U.S. congressman wants ban on junk e-mail "spam" >> WASHINGTON (Reuter) - A U.S. congressman Wednesday proposed a ban on >> "spam", unsolicited junk electronic mail that he said was clogging up >> the online baskets of internet users across the country. > There are actually two different proposals that were introduced yesterday. > This one from Chris Smith and one from a Senator in Alaska. You can find > the senators proposal at: My question, maybe someone knows, is what exactly is the definition of Spam email in this context. Is it unsolicited email, in which case how would that apply to an email which is in response to a news posting? Curiouser and curiouser ... Brian. D. Moffet, speaking for myself. But you should know that :-) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read carefully Brian. Unsolicited email of a **commercial nature**. Furthermore, when you post in a newsgroup you are soliciting responses. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 17:25:22 EDT From: John R Levine Subject: Alert: Two Anti-Spam Bills in Congress; One Good, One Bad There are two anti-spam bills in progress now. One is an "opt-out" bill filed earlier this week by Sen. Murkowski of Alaska. The other is an "opt-in" amendment to the existing junk fax law to be filed shortly by Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey. Both bills attempt to address the problems of spam, but unfortunately the Murkowski bill has several critical flaws that both make it ineffective and would impose huge extra costs on ISPs. Fortunately the Smith bill has none of these problems. The Murkowski bill: * Requires that advertisements be tagged "advertisement" and have valid contact info. * Requires that each advertiser maintain an opt-out list, with a 48 hour window permitted before acting on an opt-out request. * Requires that all ISPs provide filtering on incoming mail, with substantial fines if they don't. * Prescribes a variety of remedies, including a cumbersome proceeding before the Federal Trade Commission for ISPs accused of harboring spammers. The full text of the Murkowski bill is on the senator's web site at . This could be a disaster for ISPs. It does nothing to address the costs that spammers put on ISPs now, and adds unfunded mandates by requiring filtering of mail that nobody wanted in the first place. It also makes spam clearly legal, so the amount of spam will greatly increase. We already know the reasons opt-out doesn't work: each tiny spammer starts with an empty opt-out list, and they have an incentive to keep lousy records and lose opt-out requests. The simple filtering that the bill mandates would exclude all advertising mail, so it makes it much more difficult for existing legitimate opt-in businesses to operate since their mail would be filtered, too. The Smith bill, in contrast, is a short amendment to 47 USC 227, the existing junk fax law, to make unsolicited commercial e-mail illegal, with the same $500 civil penalty as currently applies to junk fax. It puts no new requirements on ISPs. Rather, it makes it incumbent on advertisers to sign up people affirmatively and to keep careful records of opt-in requests, so the advertisers bear the bulk of the cost. Legitimate e-mail advertisers already do these things. What you need to do: * Particularly if you run an ISP or other Internet-related business, call your representative and ask him or her to support and ideally co-sponsor the Smith bill. Tell him why the Murkowski bill would be bad for your business. * Senator Murkowski has asked for e-mail comments at commercialemail@murkowski.senate.gov. Remember, his goals are laudable, it's the implementation that has problems. Encourage him to adopt the language of the Smith bill. Incidentally, I hear that Cyber Promotions supports the Murkowski bill. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ From: stevenl@pe.net (Steven Lichter) Subject: 800 number/Spam Date: 22 May 1997 17:08:16 -0700 Organization: PE.net - Internet access from the Press-Enterprise Company It a continuing effort to let the largest amount of people know about all the new Internet options, like using your big screen TV, I am listing a 888 number that was sent to me by telecom@savetrees.com, I'm sure you all know who owns savetrees.com. The number is 888-800-4197 and the number is open between 8AM and 6PM Pacific time. I think eveyone should contact this company to find out about there new Internet options and also let them know what you think about the E-mail they send. The best way to do this is from a payphone or large PABX. Now don't abuse this as that is against the law. Any commercial E-mail to this address will be returned five million times. 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 Macintoch computers. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for calling this new number -- 888-800-4197 -- to everyone's attention. I also like your idea of returning the spam five million times; do you use a script of some sort to handle it? A better approach might be to start a mailing list. Every time you get spam, add the sender, his postmaster, his ISP, and other appropriate parties to your mailing list. Then send the new spam out to the entire list. Be sure and diddle up your own headers -- including the message-id line -- before you release it of course. This is just a variation of what we did years ago when all the spam came in the form of junk mail addressed to 'opportunity seekers' at our post office boxes. We would take the junk mail from one and stuff it in the Business Reply (postage paid) envelope of another. The only exception to this were the chain letters asking for money. We would take the entire thing, envelope and all, and put it in a larger envelope addressed to 'Postal Inspector at (sender's zip code)', with a note on the front of the new envelope saying 'illegal chain letter mail enclosed'. Of course we carefully obliterated any references to to our own address as the recipient of the mail; why get involved? Then just drop it in a mailbox without any postage. Don't worry, it will get delivered to the postal inspector at the town where it was mailed; why go to the added expense of adding postage stamps? If you did not want to spend the money on envelopes either, just obliterate your own name on the face of the existing envelope and use a bold, felt-tip pen to write 'Postal Inspector at ' on the existing envelope then drop it in a mailbox. If you decide to start a mailing list of inbound spam, sending it to other spammers so they can each read what others have written, you will want to automate the process as much as possible. Probably procmail or a similar package would work nicely. As each piece you see is approved for remailing to the list, you just pipe it through a script that rewrites the header after capturing what data it needs to add the sender to your mailing list. Be sure and circulate all their telephone numbers, especially 800 numbers. Now if you as the moderator of this list accidentally get the phone numbers mixed up so that the 800 number of one spammer is in the message of another equally (or more) obnoxious spammer, well it is just to bad if they call each other to complain; and they will since even spammers have some tolerance levels. Be sure to remove any commands in procmail or majordomo which allow for unsubscribing to the list. You don't want that. As a simple courtesy, be sure to add postmaster@aclu.org to the mailing list since it would appear they have never yet had the opportunity to read or get aquainted with the latest bunch of obnoxious creeps they'll be representing. Good luck with your new mailing list! And whatever you do, don't start adding a bunch of editorial commentaries to the bottom of messages sent by others. It isn't right for a moderator to give personal opinions. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 00:57:19 -0400 From: Ed Ellers Subject: Netizens Protection Act of 1997 The Associated Press reported tonight that Representative Chris Smith (R-New Jersey) has introduced a bill to extend the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to ban unsolicited commercial electronic mail as well as fax transmissions. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If it passes, let us just hope that the government will begin enforcing it. I understand they will be finished searching Ted K's shed sometime late this year so maybe those guys could be assigned to enforcement on this. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #129 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon May 26 00:52:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA22799; Mon, 26 May 1997 00:52:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 00:52:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705260452.AAA22799@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #130 TELECOM Digest Mon, 26 May 97 00:52:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 130 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Just as Well We Did Not Bother ... (TELECOM Digest Editor) MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals (Joseph Kim) "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" (Anthony E. Siegman) ISP Diversification Plans (Krishnan J. Iyer) UCLA Short Course on "Mobile Computing" (Bill Goodin) Pooling Phone Numbers (Tad Cook) New Call Minder Service (Robert Speirs) Oklahoma Area Codes (Tad Cook) Customer Care as Differentiator (Tara D. Mahon) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 26 May 1997 00:18:31 EDT From: ptownson@telecom-digest.org (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Just as Well We Did Not Bother ... Readers may recall late last year I suggested the possibility of a meeting of the minds here over the Memorial Day weekend; a sort of convention of telecom readers seeking to meet one another, etc. I *assumed* back then the weather would be very nice and pleasant; that we could have meetings in the park and walk around our little village for dinner and maybe a telco-arranged tour ... Well, excuuuuse me! The weather this weekend has been horrible. On Saturday it was quite nice and pleasant *most* of the day, but a very heavy rain started in the early evening. All day Sunday the temperature was back in the forties (!) with gusty wind and drizzles. Monday is not going to be much better. I've been coughing and sneezing all day; and feel like I may die sometime tomorrow if not overnight tonight. I guess it is just as well we did not plan things any further. PAT ------------------------------ From: joseph kim Subject: MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 22:49:56 -0700 Organization: Cisco Systems Reply-To: jokim@cisco.com Hi, I was wondering if anyone out there has a suggestion for me. I recently switched my long distance carrier to MCI. They promised me $50 for the switch over. Not only did I not get the $50, but I was also promised a rate of $1.83/minute for a certain country to dial long distance to and have been charged between $4-$8/minute. So I now have a long distance bill of nearly $400 which should, obviously, be much less. Oh, I also didn't mention MCI cut off my long distance without my permission. They saw that I was getting a very large bill from their exorbitant rates that they lied to me about and when I desperately needed to make a long distance phone call I was cut off. Luckily, it only took me two hours of arguing with six differnt MCI customer service representatives to get my long distance turned back on. Actually, I couldn't get it turned back on until a few days after they cut it off and so during the interim had to use 10xxx to get long distance. When I asked MCI if they would pay for the extra charge over $1.83/minute for using 10xxx since it was their fault they hung up on me. Not only will I never use MCI again, I really DO NOT want to pay the large bill that they have charged me. Can anyone direct me to some consumer advocacy group or some agency to report this to? I would also suggest to anyone out there to use extreme caution in dealing with MCI. joseph kim jokim@cisco.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can report it direct to the Federal Communications Commission if you wish, but good luck in getting any action taken. I would suggest you send them only the money actually due, however you may wish to just put a freeze on payments to them until they re-rate the calls and send a corrected bill. In the future stay away from them. Like Sprint, they pull a lot of bait-and-switch type deals where one rate is quoted to get you to sign up and then the terms change in midstream. It is better to go with a smaller company or a reseller which appreciates your business. I have always had very good luck with Frontier/Allnet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: siegman@ee.stanford.edu (Anthony E. Siegman) Subject: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 11:22:23 -0700 Organization: Stanford University I'll type in a few segments from a column by Jon Carroll recently appearing in the {San Francisco Chronicle} under the above title --------- (From the Carroll column) I hold in my hands an article from the April 24 issue of {American Banker}. It details the groundbreaking work of NationsBank Corp in relating customer profitablility with service. Says the article: "Systems capable of calculating individual customer profitability will make it possible, for example, to let less-profitable customers sit on hold longer when they call into a telephone center." Does that confirm your most paranoid fantasies? "Unprofitable customers are defined ... as those who maintain minimum balances to avoid service charges, write lots of checks, and make heavy use of branches and call centers." "NationsBank began the program April 18, mailing out fliers promoting a 24-hour banking service. Customers calling in were assigned personal identification numbers, on which the bank relies in routing calls on the basis of a predetermined profitability score ..." "Customers will be routed to 'agents trained to handle their special needs'. The idea is to give customers in the most profitable tier bend-over-backwards service within seconds. Customers ranked in the lower tiers will be routed to different service representatives. Because of larger volume, they may experience longer hold times ..." My favorite quote from the article: "Separating customers into classes could be dangerous from a public relations standpoint, said industry observers." Those industry observers: sharp as tacks, they are. ------------------------------ From: krish@bcmfax.net (Krishnan J. Iyer) Subject: ISP Diversification Plans Date: 24 May 1997 06:09:31 GMT Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service Did you know that "average fax costs of an United States Fortune 500 company is US $ 15 million a year", according to 1996 Gallop / Pitney Bowes study. Also fax costs is about 41% of their total cost of telephone communications. It is high time one should think of transferring fax traffic to low cost networks like Internet. This is where entrepreneurs like you come in to setup local nodes on a worldwide network. bcmfax.net is a company in the forefront of international communication technology. It has some interesting business opportunities to offer and you may like to find out more by visiting them at http://www.bcmfax.net or sending an email to krish@bcmfax.net What's more ... ISPs have a tremendous opportunity to leverage network access and throw it open to fax traffic? It certainly means fax costs will come down. But how much will international fax traffic increase. We have to wait and see? I appreciate your comments on "the future of faxing" and information on your diversification plans. Thank you for your time, Krishnan J. Iyer bcmfax.net Internet fax network - Join bcmfax.net now Email : krish@bcmfax.net http://www.bcmfax.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You pose an interesting scenario. I would like to hear responses if any from ISPs who have considered this angle. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bgoodin@unex.ucla.edu (Bill Goodin) Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Mobile Computing" Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 22:28:55 GMT Organization: University of California, Los Angeles On July 14-17, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Mobile Computing: Applications, Infrastructure, and Performance", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Mario Gerla, PhD, Professor, Computer Science Department, UCLA; Rajive Bagrodia, PhD, Associate Professor, Computer Science Department, UCLA; Randy H. Katz, Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UC Berkeley; and Peter Reiher, PhD, Associate Adjunct Professor, Computer Science Department, UCLA. Mobile computing is the ability to retrieve remote files, process data, collaborate and coordinate with other individuals, and update distributed data bases while "on the move". This course provides an integrated, vertical view of the mobile computing phenomenon, starting from applications and middleware, and continuing with the network infrastructure support components (wired and wireless). The characteristics of radio hardware and software, and of the radio channel, are also discussed. Two key applications are addressed: 1) a distributed file system in a mobile environment where different users work on local copies of the same file which must be periodically reconciled, and; 2) a video conference involving users connected to the network via various types of channels, from Ethernet to wireless, thus requiring dynamic rate adjustment to match different channel speeds. An important requirement for successful deployment of mobile applications is the careful evaluation of performance and investigation of alternatives prior to implementation. Given the complexity of the mobile computing system, simulation is the method of choice. This course includes a description of simulation tools which have been successfully applied to mobile network and application models. The course concludes with several demonstrations of applications--middleware and network protocols for mobile computing based on a wireless LAN testbed. Several simulation tools based on the MAISIE simulation language are also demonstrated. The course fee is $1295, which includes extensive course materials. Course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional 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. ------------------------------ Subject: Pooling Phone Numbers Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 17:13:42 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Penn. Public Utility Commission Seeks Alternative to New Area Codes By David DeKok The Patriot-News, Harrisburg, Pa. May 23--The state Public Utility Commission voted yesterday to explore alternative means of expanding the supply of telephone numbers in the hope of avoiding more area code splits or overlays. A tentative order approved by the commission is intended to free up millions of unused telephone numbers and delay the need to add more area codes or possible mandatory 10-digit dialing. Commissioner John Hanger's motion, which was approved unanimously by the PUC, seeks comment on alternative number distribution methods, one of which is called pooling. With pooling, the Number Plan Area coordinator would give out numbers only as they were actually needed to serve customers. Unused numbers presently being banked by telephone companies would be required to be returned. At present, telephone, cellular and pager companies are assigned three-digit central office codes as needed, each of which carries a block of 10,000 telephone numbers. Even if a company needs only a few dozen numbers, it receives 10,000. Last week, the PUC held a hearing in Harrisburg to discuss proposals for splitting or overlaying the 717 area code. Most witnesses at the hearing favored a split, allowing the southern half of the area code, which includes Harrisburg, to retain the 717 designation. In accordance with Hanger's motion, the PUC will enter an order allowing for a 20-day comment period plus 10 days for reply comment on the viability of a pooling proposal. The PUC also directed that a technical conference be conducted in Harrisburg by an administrative law judge 10 days after the order is entered. Final action is to be taken July 10. (c) 1997, The Patriot-News, Harrisburg, Pa. Distributed by Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News. ------------------------------ From: speirs@chebucto.ns.ca (Robert Speirs) Subject: New Call Minder Service Date: 26 May 1997 04:46:11 GMT Organization: Halifax, NS Thursday 22 May 1997: William (Bill) McMullin reports that Maritime Telephone and Telegraph (MT&T) and InfoInterActive (IIA-A) have signed a letter of intent to formalize a working relationship between the two companies and an ownership interest by MT&T in IIA. The agreement follows successful technology and market trials in Halifax of IIA's flagship product, Internet Call Manager (ICM). With ICM, customers with a single phone line can monitor their calls while on the Internet by way of a pop-up window with the calling party's Caller-ID (both name and number). There are four call handling options: ignore the call, acknowledge the call with a short greeting, transfer the call to another number (such as a private cellular telephone), or accept the call. If the customer also subscribes to a voice messaging service, such as MT&T Call Answer, ignored calls are handled by this service in the usual way. There is no need for the customer to subscribe to telephone- oriented call management services like Call Display or Call Waiting, no additional hardware is required and no additional software must be purchased. As part of this agreement, MT&T has taken an investment position in InfoInterActive. This reflects the company's new focus on participation with its customers and partners. When it was reorganized last year, the company's two major objectives were to rebuild around the needs of its customers and to make investments in companies with export potential. The speed to market of Internet Call Manager and the investment in InfoInterActive reflect these new priorities. MT&T is acquiring 250,000 shares for resources contributed under the venture and 125,000 warrants, exercisable until 1 April 1999 at prices between C$0.60 and C$1.25 per warrant. The MT&T service will be offered in two varieties at prices of C$4.99 and C$9.99 per month, a fraction of the cost of a second phone line. The first includes basic calling name and number information and the ability to acknowledge the call. The complete version adds the call control capability and includes MT&T's Call Answer voice messaging service. The ICM service offering will be expanded to include all Internet Service Provider customers, and will be made available across the province over the next six offering will be expanded to include all Internet Service Provider customers, and will be made available across the province over the next six months. MT&T will work with IIA to launch the ICM service on a national basis across Canada in June 1997, assisting with product development and playing the role of reference customer. IIA has an immediate opportunity to capitalize on market requirements with ICM MT&T is a Nova Scotia-based telecommunications company serving over 900,000 customers in Nova Scotia. For more information, contact: William (Bill) McMullin, President Infointeractive Inc Sun Tower suite 604, 1550 Bedford Hwy Bedford, NS B4A 1E6 tel:(902)832-1014/832-1611/1-800-270-1014 ext.21 fax:(902)832-1015 bill@interactive.ca http://www.interactive.ca/ Kenneth (Ken) Gary Noland, CEO & CFO Director & Investor Relations/ Sidney (Sid) P. Dutchak Chairman/ InfoInteractive Inc suite 200, 209 19th St NW Calgary, AB T2N 2H9 tel:(403)270-8421 tel:(403)630-2157/283-3600 fax:(403)270-8124 tritech@cadvision.com ------------------------------ Subject: Oklahoma Area Codes Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 10:34:52 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Oklahoma to Dial Up Two More Area Codes to Meet Phone Demand BY SHAUN SCHAFER, TULSA WORLD, OKLA. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News May 22--Oklahomans' hunger for phone-related gadgets is devouring the numbers available under the state's two area codes and will lead to the creation of two more area codes to meet needs. The 405 area code, which includes Oklahoma City, is nearing the exhaustion of possible number combinations, and the Oklahoma Corporation Commission is hurrying to get rules in place to handle another area code. John Gray, senior assistant general counsel for the commission, said 405 will run out of numbers at its current rate of use by the third quarter of 1998. The 918 area code, which includes Tulsa, should run out of numbers in the first quarter of 2001, Gray said. "An extra phone line, a modem, a pager, a beeper -- these all take numbers," Gray said. "And people keep adding them." Numbers could be gobbled up even faster as local calling opens up to competition, as promised by the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. An incoming local provider generally reserves a block of 10,000 phone numbers, Gray said. While there was no statistical breakdown on the numbers already in use, local competition will speed the demise of numbers available in the 405 and 918 areas, Gray said. "We need an order issued by the first of July" for 405, Gray said. The process to install a new area code takes about 18 months, leaving little time in the 405 area, he added. The two entities watching over the state's phone numbers -- the Oklahoma Central Office Code Administrator and the Numbering Plan Area Relief Coordinator -- filed an application with the corporation commission to deal with the exhaustion of 405 numbers. The commission, which has been busy meeting other deadlines under the Telecommunications Act, is collecting testimony from providers, such as Southwestern Bell, and other interested parties, Gray said. An administrative law judge is scheduled to hear a summary of the evidence on June 23 and issue an oral recommendation to the commission. Any appeals or requests for approval of the judge's recommendation will be presented to the corporation commission on June 26, with the commission's ruling to follow. There are two ways to provide more numbers, and whichever one is chosen in the 405 area will affect Tulsa and the 918 area. A new area code can overlay an existing one, or an area can be divided, with one section keeping the old number and the other receiving a new one. Both methods have been used in recent years. In the Chicago area, an overlay was instituted when reports showed that the area code for suburban Chicago would run out of numbers. Since 1996, that suburban area has been served by 708 and 630 area codes simultaneously. When the San Francisco Bay Area started to run out of 415 numbers in the late '80s, the area was divided. The city of San Francisco kept the 415 numbers, and the new 510 area code covered phones outside of the city limits. In Oklahoma City, the local service companies favor dividing the existing 405 area rather than bringing in an overlay number, Gray said. "All providers of local exchange are pretty much in agreement on what should be divided," Gray said. "There's an agreement that Oklahoma City should have one number and everybody else should have another. "The question is, who gets which?" Oklahoma City and Tulsa have the two largest Wide Area Calling Plans in the nation, with each measuring more than 4,200 square miles. In the 405 case, that area would be left intact and would have only one area code, either 405 or a new code, Gray said. Calls within the wide area plans are toll-free calls. In similar fashion, Tulsa's Wide Area Calling Plan, which stretches from Henryetta to Ochelata and from Snug Harbor to Jennings, would receive one area code. Whether it keeps the existing number or gets a new area code will probably be determined by whatever decision is made in the 405 area, Gray said. "Nine-one-eight will be a little easier because we will have already done it once in Oklahoma," Gray said. "It's still probably a year or so" before work will start on rules in this area. Running out of 405 number combinations marks only the latest change wrought by the boom in telecommunications. In January 1995, residents making long-distance calls in the same area code started dialing the area code along with that number. For instance, before that date a call from Tulsa to Miami was made by dialing a "1" followed by the number. That change was made as number combinations filled up in the other area codes. From 1947 to 1995, U.S. area codes contained a "0" or a "1" as the middle number in the three-digit codes. That restricted area codes to 152 combinations, and to meet the rising demand for phone numbers, the middle digit was opened in 1995 to include any number from "2" through "9." Bellcore, the administrator of the number system used in North America and parts of the Caribbean, said the change added 640 area codes to the system and would be adequate to meet needs through 2025. (c) 1997, The Tulsa (Okla.) World. Distributed by Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually 708/630 are two separate and distinct geographic areas. It is true that in the very early days of 630, it was cellular/pager stuff only, and used over the entire 312/708 area. When 847 opened, 630 was shoved to the far western suburbs, but the cellular/pager people who were in it were allowed to stay there if they desired to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 May 97 13:01:20 +0000 From: Tara D. Mahon Subject: Customer Care as Differentiator Pat, Here is a piece we put out recently as part of our NewsFirst Telecom email newsletter -- hope it interests the DIGEST. Regards, Tara D. Mahon The Insight Research Corporation Insight Examines Customer Care as a Key Differentiator Between Competing Carriers -------------------------- As competition between wireless and wireline, and between local and long distance carriers intensifies, carriers will be searching for ways to make their services distinctive and uniquely appealing to both business and residential customers. Insight has been studying this challenge and possible solutions that carriers can and are taking to make their customer services a unique differentiator. In the past month, Michael French, Insight's Vice President of Market Research, toured one of MCI's customer service centers and spoke to customer service managers at Sprint Corp. to update Insight's understanding of leading edge practices in this important area and to stimulate managers' thinking about customer needs today and how they will evolve tomorrow. Here are highlights of his message to both major carriers: 1. Serious competition has come to key sectors of the telecom market. Driven by deregulation, improved technologies, and expanding customer expectations, business and residential customers are increasingly choosing carriers and often switching carriers. No longer will carriers operate in protected territories, based upon natural monopolies or FCC licenses. 2. Carriers need to gain and sustain a critical mass of customers. Whether in the wireless, local, or long distance markets, carriers must reduce churn, which often costs them 20% of their customers each year. For example, customer acquisition costs in the wireless markets average over $500 per new customer. Thus the costs of attracting enough customers just to maintain one's market share can eat into profits and reduce a carrier's ability to deploy the advanced features needed to win tomorrow's competition. 3. Insight's research reveals that there are only three basic ways that a carrier can attract new customers: by lowering prices, by creating unique bundles of services, or by improving customer service. While these are often used in combination, Insight has observed that each carrier tends to rely on one strategy as its driving theme. Lowering prices often leads to price wars, as competitors match price cuts and everybody's profit margins are reduced. Offering unique services--like MCIOne which combines cellular, voice mail, and long distance service--is increasingly hard to accomplish for some carriers. For most carriers, this leaves customer care as the most effective asset that can be used competitively. 4. With customer care identified by all leading carriers as a key competitive asset, it becomes harder and harder for a carrier to make this a unique and cost-effective advantage. 5. Insight recommends two powerful strategies to shape customer care into an asset supporting each carriers particular goals and resources. A) Increasingly target specific groups or markets with services suited to their needs. Segment markets with different services and types of customer service. Whether it's by customer size, vertical market, or another variable like end-user mobility, segmentation is the key to uniquely serving customers' needs. Mining databases and creating new bundles of services will become more frequent and lower cost for carriers. One service or type of customer support does not fit everybody, and successful carriers will increasingly take advantage of this trend. B) Learn from the winners in other industries how companies can recreate themselves periodically. Leaders in industries as diverse as airlines, financial services, and PC manufacturing have each identified their particular strength and then developed it into a key marketing advantage. Telecom carriers can alter the traditional customer relationship management paradigm (the cycle of acquisition, retention, and win-back) by periodically re-inventing how they are perceived by customers. Insight recognizes the difficulty of this strategy, but sees the alternative as erosion of market share and profits. 6. As the telecom market becomes more competitive and competing carriers have access to similar technologies, carriers' strategies are shifting from reliance on lowest price and advanced features to more sophisticated marketing modus operandi. Insight sees this as an exciting challenge as carriers segment their markets and work to exploit their unique advantages in each market. While this may seem difficult, the alternative is to offer services as commodities and risk being viewed as slightly old-fashioned by customers. Further analysis of the customer service opportunities in telecom will be published in Insight's "Carrier Customer Services and Operations Support Systems" market research report, due out later this year. For more information on this or any of Insight's reports, please visit www.insight-corp.com. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #130 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 27 00:55:10 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA26432; Tue, 27 May 1997 00:55:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 00:55:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705270455.AAA26432@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #131 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 May 97 00:55:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 131 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (John McNamee) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (Patrick Tufts) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (John Diamant) Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam (jfmezei) Re: Congressman Wants to ban Spam (Stan Brown) Anti-Spam Coalition (Lawrence W. Kauffman) Re: Alert: Two Anti-Spam Bills in Congress; One Good, One Bad (jfmezei) S771 and Unsolicited Email (Ewhorne@aol.com) Truth in Spamming Bill (A. Padgett Peterson) Another 800 Number For Your Review (Steven Lichter) Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? (Babu Mengelepouti) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: 26 May 1997 19:22:32 -0400 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services > Anyway, those First Amendment excuses are just a crock as far as I am > concerned. I doubt seriously that the ACLU has ever suggested that spam is protected by the 1st amendment (I'd be interested in an actual cite of an example rather than knee-jerk ACLU-hater off the wall comments). Nothing about the 1st amendment suggests that anyone is required to pay attention to you if you want to talk :-). [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You want to talk about knee-jerk responses? I got a call Monday night from someone who is afraid the government might ban spam, and all the terrible things that would (in their opinion) of necessity follow right along. If they ban spam, then the next thing you know they will be banning all the newsgroups, etc ... and yes, if any attempt were made to completely forbid spam on the net the ACLU would rush to the defense of the Spamfords. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John McNamee Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 23:16:32 +0000 Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers > Senator Murkowski of Alaska just today introduced a bill (S771) into the > US Senate to control spam. > It does NOT ban spam (so no 1st Amendment problems), but does mandate truth > in routing info (no spoofed addresses, etc) and also mandates that the > first word in the Subject line be the word "advertisement" so promail > filtering would be MUCH easier. It also mandates that the name, address and > phone number of the actual sender be in the spam message itself. Murkowski's bill does nothing about the theft of services that spam represents to service providers. Spammers would still free to abuse the bandwidth, CPU time, and disk space of ISP's. A procmail-type filter can throw the message away once it arrives, but by then it's too late. The bill also ignores the whole issue of Usenet spam, which I personally find an even greater problem. I appreciate that Senator Murkowski is trying to do something about the problem, but his solution still leaves much to be desired. ------------------------------ From: zippy@cs.brandeis.edu (Patrick Tufts) Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: 27 May 1997 04:32:02 GMT Organization: Brandeis University, Waltham MA In an append to J. DeBert 's message, PAT writes: [...] > Quid pro quo -- what will you trade in exchange for protection against > junk mail, spam, fraud, etc.? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You ask what would I be willing to > trade off to get rid of spam ... why should I have to trade anything? [...] > What did the > owners of fax machines have to trade off in order to get some pro- > tection? PAT] Privacy. You cannot legally send a fax in the US without including a contact number (I forget if it has to be the telephone number for the sending machine) in the document. Pat [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh great, here we go again on this privacy nonsense. Just what I need with a mailbox full of stuff waiting to go out. You think it is really a hassle to have to identify who you are when you use the telephone, eh? I'll bet you do not like caller-id either, and having to press *67 each time around. PAT] ------------------------------ From: diamant@sde.hp.com (John Diamant) Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: 27 May 1997 00:29:57 GMT Organization: HP SESD, Fort Collins, CO Reply-To: diamant@sde.hp.com J. DeBert (onymouse@hypatia.com) wrote: > Spammers and others whine about the "right to free speech" on the net. > There is no right to free speech on the net, there never has been. > It has been upheld in a court of law and by "stare decisis" in other > courts of law. Some such cases have been thrown out of court before > ever being heard. (If anyone has records or info about these cases, > I hope they will share them with the group! I never kept the info. Some > were posted in several newsgroups years ago, during the ARPAnet & > NSFnet years and afterward.) Just to correct/clarify one point in your post. Please don't misinterpret -- I'm not in favor of spamming, and I think your other points about contract law and points made earlier about denial of service and not having permission to use are on track. However, I want to correct a statement you made. The "right to free speech" does exist on the net (though it doesn't prevent the arguments for denial of service, use of property private property without permission, etc). Here are three distinct, unrelated arguments: In the legal sense of the word "right" (as in recognized by a government): 1) The Communications Decency Act was declared Unconstitutional in Federal court (3 judge panel) on the grounds that it violated Constitutionally protected free speech on the Internet. The Supreme Court ruling on this case is still pending, but current precedent is set by the federal court ruling and that court recognized the right of free speech on the net. 2) A careful reading of the U.S. Constitution reveals the document to be a grant of explicit powers by the federal government, and not a restriction of powers. The direct implication of that grant of power is that the federal government has only enumerated powers, and therefore any encroachment upon freedom of speech by the federal government must be justified by an enumerated power (in the case of Congress, that's Article 3, section 8). Protecting people from spamming is nowhere to be found in federal powers. If you make some vague argument about interstate commerce, let me point out that it would have no validity to spam sent entirely within a single state. In the moral (natural rights sense): 3) Rights do not exist merely because a government decides to recognize them. The right to not be killed (with appropriate limits which needn't be discussed here to discuss this particular point), etc does not exist because it is recognized by a government. Rights exist in a moral sense independently of governments, but some governments recognize particular rights, and others don't. Otherwise, the term "human rights violation" wouldn't make any sense. John Diamant Software Engineering Systems Division Hewlett Packard CO. Internet: diamant@sde.hp.com Fort Collins, CO ------------------------------ From: jfmezei Subject: Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 15:07:24 -0500 Organization: SPC Reply-To: "[nospam]jfmezei"@videotron.ca > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read carefully Brian. Unsolicited email > of a **commercial nature**. Furthermore, when you post in a newsgroup > you are soliciting responses. PAT] When I post something in a newsgroup related exclusively to chocolate cookies recipees, I expect REPLIES IN THE NEWSGROUP from readers who share that particular interest, and will tolerate specific replies sent directly by EMAIL on that particular topic. I do not expect junk mail that is totally unrelated to that newsgroup when it is not addressed directly to me, even if it is not commercially oriented. (Receiving a spam about a religion is just as bad as about the opportunity to make $10000000 overnight). What frustrates me most is that one must now fudge his e-mail address in order to reduce (but not eliminate) spams and this causes many problems if novices are trying to reply to a note you posted in a newsgroup, and to an e-mail you have sent to them. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Congressman Wants to ban Spam Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 23:54:33 EDT From: stbrown@nacs.net (Stan Brown) Quoth brianm@ricochet.net (Diablo Cat) in Telecom Digest 17:129: > My question, maybe someone knows, is what exactly is the definition of > Spam email in this context. Is it unsolicited email, in which case > how would that apply to an email which is in response to a news > posting? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read carefully Brian. Unsolicited email > of a **commercial nature**. Furthermore, when you post in a newsgroup > you are soliciting responses. PAT] Yes to your last sentence, PAT; no to what precedes it. In equal quantities, "Jesus loves you" and "send postcards to a dying boy" are just as much spam as "buy my immigration service." This is made clear in the FAQs. "Spam" originally referred to articles posted to newsgroups, which predated junk email. It's not too big a stretch to refer to junk email as spam or spam email, though. In either case, it's important to preserve the definition: spam is an excessive number of postings of the same article, or substantially the same article to the newsgroups; junk email or unsolicited bulk email (UBE) is an excessive number of identical or substantially identical unsolicited email messages. Mailing lists like Telecom Digest, no matter how large, are not junk email because they have been requested by the subscribers. Observe that the proper definition does not refer in any way to the content. Spam and junk email are bad not because of the message (if any) they contain, but because they impede and even threaten the functioning of Usenet and email, to the detriment of the great majority of users. Even an ad is not spam, if the sender sends out a single copy to each of half a dozen addresses. Make Money Fast is not spam, if it is sent only to one newsgroup (or to a very few). In general, off-topic postings and ads are not spam -- unless they are posted too many times. (They're still bad; they're just not spam.) On the other hand, even an on-topic message is spam if it is posted many times to the same newsgroup. If you object that an ad is unwanted whether you plus five people get it or you plus five million people get it, I agree with you. But the reason our mailboxes fill up is that many copies of each message are sent. It's the mass quantities that are the problem: if each advertiser sent only a few copies, nobody would receive enough to be a bother. Back in the days when we got maybe one junk message a week, it was trivial to deal with. I believe that casting the definition without reference to content, as the FAQs do, places the focus where it belongs: not on "getting ads we don't want", but on "making email and Usenet unusable". If we focus simply on commercial ads, we are still vulnerable to spams from religious zealots and other idiots who aren't asking for money; we also waste energy arguing about what is and is not commercial. I hope we all get in the habit of talking about unsolicited bulk email (UBE), not unsolicited commercial email (UCE), since a piece of non-commercial spam email can be just as harmful as a piece of commercial spam email. The definition of "excessive" or "too many" is not universally agreed, though 20 seems to be the working definition for Usenet newsgroups. I fear I may have gone on too long. Though this topic is interesting and timely, I would hate to see Telecom Digest shift its primary focus to spam and other net abuse for any length of time; I'd rather see the electrons used for our core interest. Folks who want to discuss spam at greater length, advocate solutions, and learn of defense measures might want to visit the very active news.admin.net-abuse.* newsgroups, or check out the numerous Web sites. To get you started with the Web sites, I've got a couple of dozen URLs on my Web page, at http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1791/nospam.htm Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems Cleveland, Ohio mailto:stanbrown@geocities.com USA http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1791/ ------------------------------ From: Lawrence W. Kauffman Subject: Anti-Spam Coalition Date: 26 May 1997 04:02:23 GMT Organization: Anti-Spam Coalition The Anti-Spam Coalition is a non-profit organization dedicated to the legislative reform of laws pertaining to the use of unsolicited mails as a means of marketing goods and services. We need your help! Please visit our home page to find out what ASC can do for you. Become a part of the solution, not the problem. If you are currently using flames to combat spamming, you are part of the problem. Help make the internet a safe place to exchange information and ideas in a free society. Help us pass legislation that will place safeguards in place that prohibit marketers from using e-mail as a primary means to sell products. http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/8509/antispam.html Thank you! Lawrence Kauffman President/ASC http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/8509/antispam.html ------------------------------ From: jfmezei Subject: Re: Alert: Two Anti-Spam Bills in Congress; One Good, One Bad Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 14:57:39 -0500 Organization: SPC Reply-To: "[nospam]jfmezei"@videotron.ca > Incidentally, I hear that Cyber Promotions supports the Murkowski bill. Yeah, one of the multiple spams I received from them recently was routed through a Taiwan site. So they have already found a way to bypass a "local" USA law. Politicians cannot regulate the internet. There was a story recently about a canadian who had some "anonymous" "VOTE GREEN PARTY" pages on his web site and Elections Canada forced him to remove the page as its anonymity contravened elections laws in Canada. His pages quickly appeared on sites hosted outside of Canada. What would work better is a self-regulation from ISPs. Users should complain to their own ISP about each spam message they get, and then each ISP would simply block *ALL* traffic coming from ISPs that continue to supply SPAMMERs with resources. ISPs would then have to choose between hosting a single SPAMMER and very few customers as the later would not be able to send e-mail to many folks, or remove spammers and have a healthy population of users. And this would work across international boundaries. ------------------------------ From: Ewhorne@aol.com Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:55:06 EDT Subject: S771 and Unsolicited Email An open letter to Senator Murkowski: Dear Senator, Your bill, S771, is a good idea, but it takes the wrong path toward a valuable goal. I agree that the government must take steps to limit unsolicited email (SPAM), but disagree very strongly with a fundamental premise behind you proposed law. Senator, your bill scares me, more for what it doesn't say than for what it does: it doesn't say that it's wrong to waste millions of man-hours each day by using the Internet to spew filth and sleaze on a grand scale. While I agree that the government should not be entitled to dictate what I can see in my in box, I also feel strongly that the government should not establish a new "right" for those pushing pornography, get rich quick schemes, the one true faith, or anything else to bombard the Internet with email. As with the due process clause in the constitution, a requirement to observe a restriction implies the government's permission to perform the act: up until now, there hasn't been any de jure restriction on SPAM, and thus no implied right to use it. YOUR BILL WOULD ESTABLISH THAT RIGHT - AND THAT WOULD BE WRONG. The early users of the Internet were technical professionals, who lived in an academic atmosphere that forbade lying, discouraged showmanship, demanded proof for claims made, and assured equal attention to all with a well reasoned argument to make, no matter what their race or background. This academic habit of trust and tolerance permeated the early Internet culture, and became known as "Netiquette". In large part, it survives to this day -- but the sleazy hustlers now trying to make easy money from the Internet have taken advantage of the "netizens" trust, and the lack of security on the net, to pervert both the trust and the future of the net. Make no mistake: the Internet is now at a crossroad, and you are choosing the direction it takes. As you consider this matter, you will hear many claims calling forth the First Amendment. However, all of the facile and self-serving arguments made by those generating SPAM quickly fall apart when held up to the light of common sense: there is no right to shout "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre, nor a right to peddle pornography inside a school. There is, most importantly, no right for a mugger to confront me with a demand for money, EVEN IF HE TELLS ME IN ADVANCE THAT HE WILL! Please, do not dismiss my analogy: those sending unsolicited email are robbing me and my employer and the Internet Service Providers with whom we contract, just as surely as a streetcorner thug claiming to be a loan collector. The sleaze merchants will, no doubt, compare themselves to the various direct mail businesses -- while forgetting to mention that direct mail costs money, and thus has a built in incentive to lessen mail sent to those who don't want it. Individuals such as Sanford Wallace are making fortunes by shifting the costs of their direct advertisements to their victims and away from themselves. Morover, the money needed to send direct mail provides a powerful incentive to maintain and use an up-to-date list of those who don't want it. Compare this to the Internet, where the incentive would be to sabotage any "opt out" process. Lastly, spammers seek to minimize ALL costs, including that of answering complaints - while I may not care for mail sent to my house by my local supermarket, I can voice my displeasure, up close and personal, at the business in question, and that makes it less of an irritant than SPAM. More importantly from the government's perspective, direct mail goes to my HOUSE, not my workplace. I do not have to deal with mail sent to my house until I choose, and throwing away an unwanted ad wastes only my personal time - but email arriving at my workplace demands immediate attention and classification, thus wasting money that I, my boss, and the stockholders of my employer want used productively. Finally, I will touch on the technical problem of SPAM. I was present at the creation of the Internet: as a telephone company technician, I installed some of the first 50 Kb/s data lines going into MIT. These circuits have given ways to fiber optic lines that carry traffic at gigabit rates: but there is never going to be enough bandwidth on the Internet, and SPAM increases the problem a thousandfold. I have seen the net grow, and had looked forward to watching it become a means of education and commerce that might benefit all Americans: now I see, instead, those using the net to send SPAM are perverting it without any thought of the cost to others. Soon after FAX machines became a standard business tool, congress took on the unpleasant, but necessary, job of forbidding unsolicited FAX messages. The law has worked quite well, and I think you should join with Representative Chris Smith to extend the anti-fax protections to the Internet. Sincerely, E. William Horne 43 Deerfield Rd. Sharon MA 02067-2301 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 13:07:20 EDT From: A. Padgett Peterson Subject: Truth in Spamming Bill Pat - have been quiet for a while since have been embroiled in a legal absurdity (see http://www.freivald.org/~padgett/ if you want details), but agree with you completely about the 1st Amendment. It guarentees the ability to speak freely (and, by extension, communicate freely). It does not provide for protection from the effects of that speech, nor does it require that anyone listen. In fact all the 1st amendment provides is that the government will stay out of the matter. What I am concerned about is that abuse is laying the groundwork for the regulation of the Internet by the FCC. Nothing in the 1st amendment say the government must provide a soapbox for a speaker to stand on and nothing says there must be an Internet. Such regulatory power would provide for a requirement for a subject line header and a valid return address (RFC 821 provides for real time validation of the source but no-one bothers with that. Certainly in 1923, no-one was concerned about any regulation of radio ... Warmly, Padgett (UDA) ------------------------------ From: stevenl@pe.net (Steven Lichter) Subject: Another 800 Number For Your Review Date: 26 May 1997 08:20:11 -0700 Organization: PE.net - Internet access from the Press-Enterprise Company In an effort to pass important information about new products on the internet that have 800 numbers, here is another one: 800-942-9304. This will give you a deminstration of new digital TV's. If you are interested in getting information by fax, call 512-404-1269 (not free unless you are local to them). It is advised you use a pay phone or large PABX for the 800 number and remember not to harass them as that is against the law. *****LEGAL NOTICE TO ALL BULK E-MAILERS***** NOTICE TO BULK EMAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, 227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. I ALSO DON'T BUY FROM BULK E-MAILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 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 Macintoch computers. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 04:09:32 -0700 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? Spamford appears to be multi-homed, if the research I have done is any indication. I took the novel approach of looking up who owns the IP blocks that his nameservers run on. His nameservers are easily obtainable by a simple whois: Cyber Promotions, Inc (CYBERPROMO-DOM) 8001 Castor Avenue Suite #127 Philadelphia, PA 19152 US Domain Name: CYBERPROMO.COM Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Wallace, Sanford (SW1708) domreg@CYBERPROMO.COM 215-628-9780 Billing Contact: Wallace, Sanford (SW1708) domreg@CYBERPROMO.COM 215-628-9780 Record last updated on 24-Jan-97. Record created on 26-Apr-96. Database last updated on 25-May-97 04:56:34 EDT. Domain servers in listed order: NS7.CYBERPROMO.COM 205.199.2.250 NS5.CYBERPROMO.COM 205.199.212.50 NS8.CYBERPROMO.COM 207.124.161.65 NS9.CYBERPROMO.COM 207.124.161.50 Well, starting with ns7.cyberpromo.com, it's no surprise: Whois: net 205.199.2 AGIS/Net99 (NETBLK-NET99-BLK4) NET99-BLK4 205.198.0.0 - 205.199.255.0 Cyber Promotions Inc (NETBLK-CYBERPROMO-205-199B) CYBERPROMO-205-199B 205.199.2.0 - 205.199.2.255 And the same for ns5.cyberpromo.com... Whois: whois net 205.199.212 AGIS/Net99 (NETBLK-NET99-BLK4) NET99-BLK4 205.198.0.0 - 205.199.255.0 Cyber Promotions Inc (NETBLK-CYBERPROMO-205-199) CYBERPROMO-205-199 205.199.212.0 - 205.199.212.255 But wait? Is spamford multihoming? A Cable & Wireless Class C block! Whois: net 207.124.161 Cable & Wireless, Inc. (NETBLK-NET3-CWI-NET) NET3-CWI-NET 207.124.0.0 - 207.124.255.255 IDCI (NETBLK-CWI-IDCI2) CWI-IDCI2 207.124.160.0 - 207.124.164.255 IDCI (NETBLK-IDCI-BLK-11) IDCI-BLK-11 207.124.161.0 - 207.124.162.255 But strangely, it doesn't resolve... 1 2427 ms 2135 ms 2716 ms Max18.Seattle.WA.MS.UU.NET [207.76.5.24] 2 1235 ms 929 ms 477 ms Ar1.Seattle.WA.MS.UU.NET [207.76.5.3] 3 175 ms 167 ms 623 ms Fddi0-0.CR1.SEA1.Alter.Net [137.39.33.41] 4 213 ms 263 ms 265 ms 110.Hssi4-0.CR1.TCO1.Alter.Net [137.39.69.121] 5 271 ms 264 ms 597 ms 313.atm1-0.gw1.tco1.alter.net [137.39.21.153] 6 258 ms 990 ms 244 ms cwix2-gw.customer.ALTER.NET [137.39.184.82] 7 739 ms 482 ms 655 ms nyd-7513-1-h4-0.cwix.net [207.124.104.50] 8 581 ms 257 ms 490 ms ny1-7000-02-f0/0.cwi.net [205.136.191.228] 9 634 ms 1044 ms 1183 ms ny1-7000-01-f4/0.cwi.net [205.136.191.227] 10 580 ms 358 ms 297 ms idci-cwi.cwi.net [205.136.226.210] 11 232 ms 731 ms 302 ms phl-bcn1-client-router.idci.net [205.136.21.3] 12 1267 ms 1197 ms 899 ms 146.145.254.62 13 * * * Request timed out. 14 * * * Request timed out. 15 * * * Request timed out. And another! Whois: net 207.124.161 Cable & Wireless, Inc. (NETBLK-NET3-CWI-NET) NET3-CWI-NET 207.124.0.0 - 207.124.255.255 IDCI (NETBLK-CWI-IDCI2) CWI-IDCI2 207.124.160.0 - 207.124.164.255 IDCI (NETBLK-IDCI-BLK-11) IDCI-BLK-11 207.124.161.0 - 207.124.162.255 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What is IDCI, I wonder? This one doesn't resolve either. 1 532 ms 188 ms 168 ms Max18.Seattle.WA.MS.UU.NET [207.76.5.24] 2 1284 ms 2128 ms 2321 ms Ar1.Seattle.WA.MS.UU.NET [207.76.5.3] 3 3037 ms 2575 ms 453 ms Fddi0-0.CR1.SEA1.Alter.Net [137.39.33.41] 4 634 ms 475 ms 241 ms 110.Hssi4-0.CR1.TCO1.Alter.Net [137.39.69.121] 5 887 ms 1357 ms 929 ms 313.atm1-0.gw1.tco1.alter.net [137.39.21.153] 6 508 ms 447 ms 260 ms cwix2-gw.customer.ALTER.NET [137.39.184.82] 7 284 ms 275 ms 270 ms nyd-7513-1-h4-0.cwix.net [207.124.104.50] 8 610 ms 495 ms * ny1-7000-02-f0/0.cwi.net [205.136.191.228] 9 300 ms 264 ms 683 ms ny1-7000-01-f4/0.cwi.net [205.136.191.227] 10 621 ms 233 ms 275 ms idci-cwi.cwi.net [205.136.226.210] 11 275 ms 250 ms 767 ms phl-bcn1-client-router.idci.net [205.136.21.3] 12 648 ms 954 ms 647 ms 146.145.254.58 13 * * * Request timed out. 14 * * * Request timed out. 15 * * * Request timed out. 16 * * * Request timed out. Could Spamford have another provider up his sleeve? I wonder if Cable & Wireless is planning to give him a link when Agis finally bites the bullet and drops him. I could drop a couple of suggestions. Performing traceroutes into random addresses in his class C blocks revealed some very interesting results. And finally, even though he has disabled nslookup on most of his machines, he forgot one ... So here ya go. nslookups on his most infamous domains... answerme.com. SOA answerme.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (1 17 172800 3600 1728000 172800) answerme.com. NS ns7.cyberpromo.com answerme.com. NS ns9.cyberpromo.com answerme.com. MX 5 answerme.com answerme.com. A 205.199.212.8 localhost A 127.0.0.1 ftp CNAME answerme.com news CNAME answerme.com www CNAME cybermirror1.com answerme.com. SOA answerme.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (1 17 172800 3600 1728000 172800) cybermirror1.com. SOA cybermirror1.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com . (117 172800 3600 1728000 172800) cybermirror1.com. NS ns7.cyberpromo.com cybermirror1.com. NS ns9.cyberpromo.com cybermirror1.com. MX 5 cybermirror1.com cybermirror1.com. A 205.199.2.248 answerme A 205.199.212.8 news CNAME cybermirror1.com localhost A 127.0.0.1 www CNAME cybermirror1.com auto1 A 205.199.212.36 auto2 A 207.124.161.91 auto3 A 207.124.161.78 ftp CNAME cybermirror1.com cybermirror1.com. SOA cybermirror1.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com . (117 172800 3600 1728000 172800) cyberpromo.com. SOA cyberpromo.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (126 172800 3600 1728000 172800) cyberpromo.com. NS ns7.cyberpromo.com cyberpromo.com. NS ns9.cyberpromo.com cyberpromo.com. MX 5 cyberpromo.com cyberpromo.com. MX 10 cyberpromo.com cyberpromo.com. A 205.199.212.36 news CNAME cyberpromo.com ns5 A 205.199.212.50 ns5 MX 10 ns5.cyberpromo.com ns7 MX 10 cyberpromo.com ns7 A 205.199.2.250 ns8 A 207.124.161.65 ns8 MX 10 ns8.cyberpromo.com localhost A 127.0.0.1 localhost A 205.199.212.36 localhost MX 10 cyberpromo.com ns9 A 207.124.161.51 ns9 MX 10 ns9.cyberpromo.com www A 205.199.2.247 ftp CNAME cyberpromo.com cyberpromo.com. SOA cyberpromo.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (126 172800 3600 1728000 172800) ispam.net. SOA ispam.net hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (113 172800 3600 1728000 172800) ispam.net. NS ns7.cyberpromo.com ispam.net. NS ns9.cyberpromo.com ispam.net. A 205.199.212.34 ispam.net. MX 5 ispam.net localhost A 127.0.0.1 ftp CNAME ispam.net news CNAME ispam.net www CNAME cyberpromo.com ispam.net. SOA ispam.net hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (113 172800 3600 1728000 172800) keepmailing.com. SOA keepmailing.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (111 172800 3600 1728000 172800) keepmailing.com. NS ns7.cyberpromo.com keepmailing.com. NS ns9.cyberpromo.com keepmailing.com. MX 5 keepmailing.com keepmailing.com. A 205.199.212.30 localhost A 127.0.0.1 ftp CNAME keepmailing.com news CNAME keepmailing.com www CNAME keepmailing.com keepmailing.com. SOA keepmailing.com hostmaster.cyberpromo.com. (111 172800 3600 1728000 172800) Happy umm ... exploring. Of course, I would NEVER want ANYONE to even THINK of doing anything malicious with this information. HACKING IS ILLEGAL! I love Jeff Slaton. I love Spamford. They help the economy. AGIS is our friend. . /|\ //|\\ Welcome to the rainforest... ///|\\\ dialtone@vcn.bc.ca [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for passing that information along. Anyone from Cable & Wireless want to look into things from that side and give us a followup? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #131 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 27 01:32:18 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA28897; Tue, 27 May 1997 01:32:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 01:32:18 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705270532.BAA28897@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #132 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 May 97 01:32:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 132 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Call for Participation: IJCAI97 WS on Programming in Temporal (M. Orgun) Book Review: "LAN Times Guide to Wide Area Networks" by Parnell (Rob Slade) Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" (John Cropper) Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" (Eric Ewanco) Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" (William H. Bowen) Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab (Herb Stein) Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab (P Morgan) Stopping the Splits (was Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban) (Jim Gottlieb) Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone (oldbear@arctos.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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 26 May 1997 14:04:07 +1000 From: Mehmet ORGUN Subject: Call for Participation: IJCAI97 WS on Programming in Temporal Reply-To: Mehmet ORGUN CALL FOR PARTICIPATION Workshop on Programming in Temporal and Non Classical Logics to be held as part of 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-97) Nagoya, Japan, 25 August 1997 Temporal logics originating in philosophy and formal linguistics have been intensively investigated within both AI and traditional Computer Science. A variety of different approaches and formalisms have been developed, some of them admitting and supporting automated reasoning techniques and having strong similarities to those which have evolved in the context of classical logic. Executable fragments of these logics have been proposed in order to provide more appropriate logical techniques for dealing with change in time. Basically, two different approaches to execution of the temporal logic formalism have evolved. The first, which is compatible with the classical logic programming paradigm, is aimed towards a logical basis for temporal databases and knowledge based systems for reasoning about time and, to be more general, a robust basis for the development of advanced AI systems. Its execution is based on deduction in tractable fragments of suitable temporal logics. The second approach is more motivated by a classical computer science problem, namely to define and develop a uniform framework for programming and verification of computer programs, especially those relying on imperative and reactive behavior. Execution within this second approach corresponds to model construction of the formulae in question and is based on the so called imperative future approach. A renewed interest on programming paradigms based on non classical logics has also been stimulated recently by new issues in the context of concurrent constraint logic programming, (temporal) deductive databases, programming of reactive systems, embedded AI systems and multi-agent systems. WORKSHOPS AIMS: The aim of this workshop is to provide a forum both for the exchange of ideas and for the identification of the potential roles and nature of the emerging paradigm of Executable Temporal and Non Classical Logics. Our intention is to bring together researchers in this area, to identify common ground, relevant experiences, applications, open problems and possible future developments. In particular, we wish to encourage cross-fertilization between different approaches and to improve the understanding of (tractable) execution of temporal logics. Special emphasis will be given to the study of computation models in the context of Artificial Intelligence, and to new approaches to programming in the context of programming of reactive and embedded AI systems. AREAS OF INTEREST: This workshop will build upon the 1993 Workshop on Executable Modal and Temporal Logics that was organized as part of IJCAI-93, and the 1995 Workshop on Executable Temporal Logics organized as part of IJCAI-95. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, - theoretical issues in executable temporal logics - relationship between execution and temporal theorem-proving - relationship of executable temporal logics to (temporal) databases - design of executable temporal logics - operational models and implementation techniques - programming support and environments - comparative studies of languages - applications and case studies WORKSHOP PARTICIPATION: To encourage informal interaction and the exchange of ideas, attendance will be limited to approximately 30 invited participants. Those wishing to attend without presenting papers are encouraged to submit a statement of interest consisting of a single page description of research interests and current work, to be used to demonstrate the ability of the non-presenting participants to contribute to the discussions by May 20th 1997 to either of the programme chair below. Christoph Brzoska Email: brzoska@ira.uka.de Department of Computer Science Tel: (+49) 721 608 35 64 University of Karlsruhe Fax: (+49) 721 60 77 21 P.O. Box 69 80 D-76128 Karlsruhe, Germany Michael Fisher Email: M.Fisher@doc.mmu.ac.uk Department of Computing Tel: (+44) 161 247 1488 Manchester Metropolitan University Fax: (+44) 161 247 1483 Chester Street Manchester M1 5GD, United Kingdom WORKSHOP PROGRAMME COMMITTE: Marianne Baudinet (Free University of Brussels, Belgium) Christoph Brzoska (Karlsruhe University, Germany) Thom Fruehwirth (Ludwig Maximilians University, Germany) Michael Fisher (Manchester Metropolitan University, UK) Rajeev Gore (Australian National University, Australia) Vineet Gupta (Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, USA) Shinji Kono (University of the Ryukyus, Japan) Stephan Merz (Ludwig Maximilians University, Germany) Ben Moszkowski (Newcastle University, UK) Vijay Saraswat (AT& T Research Labs, USA) Karl Schafer (Karlsruhe University, Germany) Mehmet Orgun (Macquarie University, Australia) COSTS: All workshop participants will be required to be registered to the main IJCAI'97 conference. An additional fee of $US 50 will be charged to cover costs of the workshop. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Information about IJCAI'97 can be accessed via the IJCAI home page: http://www.ijcai.org/ijcai-97/ Information about the workshop, including the workshop programme, will be available via http://iseran.ira.uka.de/~brzoska/ijcai97tlp.html. Christoph Brzoska Institute for logic, complexity, and deductive systems University of Karlsruhe Phone: + 49 721 608 35 64 P.O.Box 69 80 Fax: + 49 721 60 77 21 D - 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany E-mail: brzoska@ira.uka.de URL: iseran.ira.uka.de/~brzoska ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:54:05 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "LAN Times Guide to Wide Area Networks" by Parnell BKLTGWAN.RVW 970226 "LAN Times Guide to Wide Area Networks", Tere Parnell, 1997, 0-07-882228-9, U$34.95/C$50.95 %A Tere Parnell tere_parnell@lantimes.com %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9B6 %D 1997 %G 0-07-882228-9 %I McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne %O U$34.95/C$50.95 +1-800-565-5758 +1-905-430-5134 fax: 905-430-5020 %P 528 %T "LAN Times Guide to Wide Area Networks" While professionals might find it a bit simplistic, for the average non- technical (or, at least, non-data comm) manager this is an excellent guide through the pitfalls of setting up networks encompassing more than a single building. The material is up to date, useful, and presented in a friendly manner. I found the organization of the material a bit disjointed at times, and was disappointed that the "explanations" of some of the newer technologies was more technical rather than based on uses, strengths, or weaknesses. Overall, though, this provides a quick and helpful guide. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKLTGWAN.RVW 970226 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse Please note the Peterson story - http://www.netmind.com/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 08:48:30 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises Anthony E. Siegman wrote in article ... > I'll type in a few segments from a column by Jon Carroll recently > appearing in the {San Francisco Chronicle} under the above title > > (From the Carroll column) > I hold in my hands an article from the April 24 issue of {American > Banker}. It details the groundbreaking work of NationsBank Corp in > relating customer profitablility with service. > Says the article: "Systems capable of calculating individual customer > profitability will make it possible, for example, to let > less-profitable customers sit on hold longer when they call into a > telephone center." Ahhh ... the miracles of modern technology. To be able to segregate customers so you can pamper some, and abuse others ... all based on profit! > Does that confirm your most paranoid fantasies? > "Unprofitable customers are defined ... as those who maintain minimum > balances to avoid service charges, write lots of checks, and make > heavy use of branches and call centers." > "NationsBank began the program April 18, mailing out fliers promoting > a 24-hour banking service. Customers calling in were assigned > personal identification numbers, on which the bank relies in routing > calls on the basis of a predetermined profitability score ..." > "Customers will be routed to 'agents trained to handle their special > needs'. The idea is to give customers in the most profitable tier > bend-over-backwards service within seconds. Customers ranked in the > lower tiers will be routed to different service representatives. > Because of larger volume, they may experience longer hold times ..." > My favorite quote from the article: "Separating customers into classes > could be dangerous from a public relations standpoint, said industry > observers." People must remember that businesses exist solely because of profit. Conversely, businesses must remember that profit is directly proportional to the amount of services rendered to each and every customer, and while one particular customer may not directly produce fantastic profits themselves, word-of-mouth business produced by serving them properly might well make up for that ... I would strongly encourage ANY customer of ANY company that is dissatisfied to freely vote with their wallet ... John Cropper, Webmaster voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 http://www.lincs.net/ The latest compiled area code information is available from us! NPAs, NXXs, Dates, all at http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ ------------------------------ From: Eric Ewanco Subject: Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" Date: 26 May 1997 09:05:28 -0400 Organization: US Robotics In article siegman@ee.stanford.edu (Anthony E. Siegman) writes: > "Customers will be routed to 'agents trained to handle their special > needs'. The idea is to give customers in the most profitable tier > bend-over-backwards service within seconds. Customers ranked in the > lower tiers will be routed to different service representatives. > Because of larger volume, they may experience longer hold times ..." Hope they've taken into account 800 number customer service lines. Putting an unprofitable customer on hold longer on an 800 line will only make him more unprofitable. Anyone else think it weird that those who maintain minimum balances are regarded as scofflaws? I thought the whole point of minimum balance fees was to penalize those who did little business with the bank and "encourage" them to boost their balances. All this time I've felt guilty when I've fallen below my minimum balance; now apparently some banks would consider me a bad customer because I meet the minimum requirements they demanded. It's like this Drabble cartoon I saw. Drabble gets a letter from his credit card company. It says [this is from memory, I'm probably not doing it justice], "Dear Mr. Drabble: According to your credit history, you consistently pay your balances on full and on time. You incur no late fees, interest, or service charges. You are a responsible and trustworthy consumer. [Here Drabble smiles. Next panel:] Therefore we are cancelling your account. [Next panel:] We don't like your kind." # __ __ Eric Ewanco # IC | XC eje@world.std.com # ---+--- http://www.wp.com/Eric_Ewanco # NI | KA Framingham, MA; USA ------------------------------ From: bowenb@best.com (William H. Bowen) Subject: Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 06:37:15 GMT Reply-To: bowenb@best.com siegman@ee.stanford.edu (Anthony E. Siegman) wrote: > I'll type in a few segments from a column by Jon Carroll recently > appearing in the {San Francisco Chronicle} under the above title > (From the Carroll column) > I hold in my hands an article from the April 24 issue of {American > Banker}. It details the groundbreaking work of NationsBank Corp in > relating customer profitablility with service. > "NationsBank began the program April 18, mailing out fliers promoting > a 24-hour banking service. Customers calling in were assigned > personal identification numbers, on which the bank relies in routing > calls on the basis of a predetermined profitability score ..." Anthony, With NationsBank, NOTHING surprises me!!! As far as I'm concerned, they are the all-time, lowest, sleazest bunch of swine that have ever inhabited the earth! Compared to them, BifA and Wells-Fargo are saints. Regards, Bill Bowen bowenb@best.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein) Organization: The Herb Stein Group Date: 25 May 97 17:55:44 GMT I've got "Distinctive Ringing" on my main line. You know - normal ring, long and two shorts and short and two longs. My recording very clearly says "You have reached 227-1310 ..." and the idiots that call one of the other numbers will cheerfully leave a message. It's comforting to know that the "idiot" probably drives to work on the same highway as I do. Jeesh! Herb & Ellie Stein St. Louis, Mo. herb@herbstein.com ------------------------------ From: P Morgan Subject: Re: Why Not Have a Pizza Delivered by Taxicab Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:25:32 +0100 In message Roger Fajman wrote: > Well, there's no excuse for not listening to what the person on the > other end says -- if you can understand it. When I ring a business number, about eight of ten times, I say "Sorry -- could you confirm the name of the company again, please ?" which seems to hit the staff that their fast-as-they-can-get-it-out is only comprehensible to themself and I've often found that follow-up calls are greeted in a more understandable manner. ------------------------------ From: jimmy@sinden.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Stopping the Splits (was Re: Ohio Suburb Attempts to Ban) Date: 23 May 1997 15:16:18 -0700 Organization: Info Connections, San Diego, California In article , > someone has to stop this proliferation of area codes ... or the term > will simply lose its meaning. If they had just listened to me :-) years ago when I proposed 8-digit dialing, then we wouldn't be in this mess today. NOTE: Remove the temp?? hostname to reply after two weeks. Jim Gottlieb | E-Mail: jimmy[@]info.com | In Japan: jimmy[@]denwa.linc.or.jp V-Mail: +1 619 260 6912 | Fax: +1 619 558 1113 My Home Page URL: http://www.info.com/jimmy/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 18:31:55 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Re: Working With the Public on the Telephone > Don't forget those of us that had the fortune to work tech > support and help desk. Many are the stories I can tell you about > working support for a major publisher of microcomputer-based library > automation software based in McHenry, IL (who's company name I'll not > divulge here because I'm still friendly with most of senior management > there, as well as a few that are still working in support since I left > in 1991.) D'jawanna (PA dutch slang, for those that ask) talk about a > technophobic group of people? Try dealing with public school > librarians! While most of them finally caught on to what was going > on, there were several who were clueless on where the power switch was > on an Apple IIe. . . Although I can vouch for the fact that many librarians are among the most techno-savvy users of information retrieval systems, Randy's comment brings back memories of an event which happened at my son's elementary school about four years ago when he was a student in the sixth grade. Our town had networked the libraries of the various schools as the first step toward actually networking the schools themselves. My son was studying in the library after school one day when I came by to offer him a ride home. It was about closing time for the library and the school librarian was trying to email a memo to all of the school librarians concerning some general issue or another. Anyway, there was usually a student from the high school helping out who knew the computer system fairly well. However, he had just left for the day. So my son, overhearding the school librarian asking for help from an equally clueless teacher, shows the librarian how to send her memo. About a minute later, as we are about to walk out the door, I hear a 'beep' from the librarians computer and the librarian exclaims: "Oh, my! It says I have mail. And it's my own memorandum." At that, my son walks back over to her desk and looks at her as if she is the silliest person in the world. With the sound of forebearance usually reserved for use by parents and teachers, he announces with the voice of 12-year-old authority: "Well, you sent it to *ALL* the librarians. You are a librarian, aren't you?" Cheers, The Old Bear ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #132 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 27 02:15:26 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA01390; Tue, 27 May 1997 02:15:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 02:15:26 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705270615.CAA01390@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #133 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 May 97 02:15:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 133 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Mobiles Safe, Study Finds, But They do Heat Brain (Monty Solomon) Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Dub Dublin) Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? (Stewart Fist) Re: Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone (Russell E. Sorber) Re: Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone (Simon Edgett) Central Office Photos Wanted (ken@randomc.com) Re: Audio Monitoring When Phone is On Hook (Thomas Tonino) Re: ISDN U Interface Wiring/Electrical Interface (Eric Ewanco) Re: How Do You Dial a Vanity 800 Number? (Bill Newkirk) Re: How Do You Dial a Vanity 800 Number? (Barry Margolin) Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 27 May 1997 00:14:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mobiles Safe, Study Finds, But They Do Heat Brain Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM FYI. From Reuters. 11:39 AM ET 05/22/97 Mobiles safe, study finds, but they do heat brain (Recasts to include later comments on brain warming) By Roland Moller HELSINKI, Finland (Reuter) - A Finnish study partly funded by the telecommunications industry has found mobile phones pose no health threat to phone users, although they do transmit heat to people's brains, researchers said Thursday. The study by four Finnish institutes examined the effect of radio frequencies used by mobile phones on the brains of 19 people and on mice, and found no health hazards. Researchers said it was clear human brains do convert mobile phone radio waves into heat, but the levels were far from hazardous. However, they are near the top end of international safety recommendations so should be examined more. Human brains can absorb up to 60 percent of the energy from mobile phone radiowaves, which would still be well below biologically risky levels, said Kari Jokela, researcher at the Finnish Center for Radiation and Nuclear Safety. Citing international radiation safety recommendations that people's brains should not be exposed to more than two watts of energy per kg of head weight, he said the potential maximum exposure from a mobile phone was near that limit. ``Since we are close to the limits here, more research is needed,'' he told a news conference. Maila Hietanen, researcher at the state-funded Occupational Health Institute, said a separate test to see if brainwaves were in any way affected by mobile signals had shown no hazards. ``The results are so consistent that the tests are completely sufficient,'' she said. The tests on mice examined development of cancer and showed that radio frequency radiation did not foster the disease, but the report said more research on the dead animals would be needed for final conclusions. ``There were no mortality differences between the animals exposed to radiowave radiation and the control group,'' the report said. Begun in 1994, the study was part of a broader European investigation of the effects of electromagnetic fields. It was carried out by researchers from the University of Kuopio, the Finnish Center for Radiation and Nuclear Safety, the Occupational Health Institute and the Technical Research Institute VTT. Among those funding it were telecommunications operators including Telecom Finland Oy and the Helsinki telephone company HPY and mobile phone makers Nokia and Benefon. ------------------------------ From: Dub Dublin - Sun Network Ambassador Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 16:53:11 -0500 Organization: Sun Microsystems Houston Michael Wright wrote: > Bemson wrote: > There is no research out there that has established ANY causal > relationship between cell phones and brain tumors. And there never > will be. I'm not the least bit paranoid about these things, nor do I think there's any cause for alarm, but blanket statements like the one above deny the fact that there is an unknown (but we expect, low) risk associated with exposure (particularly long-term exposure) to various types of EM radiation. Epidemiological research is generally hard-pressed to prove causality at all -- a correlation is the best that can be hoped for without the type of long-term, large-scale studies that have the tobacco companies in hot water lately. I wouldn't bet on the second sentence -- not because I feel cellphones are dangerous (if I did, I wouldn't have the cellular bill$ I do), but simply because it is at least possible that long-term exposure to narrowband near-microwave radiation could have some harmful effects. By the time we know for sure, it will be too late to matter (see below.) > A cell phone operates with a transmitter power of only 3/4 of > a watt. As you read this, you are sitting in a far more powerful > electromagnetic field, the one generated by your computer monitor. Your monitor and your cellphone are as different as they look. There are several components to the EM radiation we are exposed to. In particular, electric and magnetic fields appear to have different effects on biological organisms. These effects are complex (and not at all well-understood) functions of at least: electric and magnetic field strengths, radited power/power density, frequency density and distribution, waveform shape (risetime), and possibly many other factors as well. We just don't know yet. > As to cordless phones, they operate with a transmitter power of 100 > milliwatts (one-tenth of a watt) so they, too, constitute no hazard > whatsoever ... at least from the magnetic field. Magnetic field is virtually zero. But the lower radiated power, as well as the lower frequency probably make cordless phones much safer than cellulars (which are themselves probably nearly harmless.) > By way of comparison, many radio stations throw off 100,000 watts ( > one million times the energy of a cordless phone) and the transmitter > personnel sit in that electromagnetic field all day, every day with no > problems. Well, they're not keeling over like they've been poleaxed, but there's anecdotal evidence that there may be some minor long-term effects. For example, Air Force pilots and police and Highway Patrol officers have fewer male children than would ordinarily be expected. Some people think their occupational exposure to relatively high levels of microwave energy may be responsible. (Only a few years ago, before instant-on radar, cops routinely left their radar guns on and resting inches from their gonads while waiting for the next unlucky revenue provider to crest the rise. Sometimes I wish they'd been using 2 kW units ...) I think it's fair to say we don't know enough to accurately gauge the effects (or lack thereof) of such exposure yet. > The cellphone / brain-tumor *scare* is just another example of Junk > Science Meets Tabloid Media. I'll agree most of the scare is unfortunately driven by political agenda and modern media's bent for "infotainment" (read sensational garbage). It would be good to have more hard data on the effects of EM radiation, though ... that's what leads to intelligent engineering decisions. In any case, as mentioned above, by the time we know the risks of the current technologies, it won't matter anymore, because the modulation methods will have changed so much as to render the research useless (i.e., we'll be faced with yet another unknown risk.) With the rapid move to digital signals, the cahracteristics of the biological effects change significantly: On one hand, the risetime effect is worsened because of the sharp square waveform of digital signals, on the other hand, power density and frequency distribution (particularly with spread spectrum techniques) are expected to significantly reduce the risk. Which effect is greater? It will be a long time until we know for sure ... In the mean time, if you're worried, use handheld radio devices based on spread spectrum techniques -- they work better anyhow! (Hey! Maybe that's how I can justify a Q-phone! Anything else would just be unsafe!) Dub Dublin Sun Microsystems Market Segment Manager 12 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500 Healthcare & Petroleum Houston, Texas 77046 USA dub.dublin@sun.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 12:32:43 +1000 From: fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as bad as Cellulars? Bill Sohl (billsohl@planet.net) writes: > Please point us (me) to the specific study or studies that hae made > such a conclusion. For the more notable of the DNA/tumour specific studies see For a brief bibliography of the wider field, about 250 research reports, see and for an overview of the current controversy, see > I have never seen any such references or conclusions made in relation > to ham radio operators (I am a ham), or most of these other jobs and > occupations. Without specific references, your comments are hearsay > at best and without substantiation at all. The fact that you haven't heard of this, is a problem that you alone can solve Bill. But to accuse me of "hearsay" and "without substantiation at all" is a bit much when I have included in each posting a direct link to a bibliography of 250 research papers, with a mass of layman's explanations. The whole of my site, and most of my postings have been littered with references which can be easily checked. The ham and radio-operators studies that you dismiss as hearsay, have been widely discussed and quoted in the medical and biomedical literature for a decade. The main study on ham radio operators was conducted by Milham in California and Washington. He used the FCC records to look up the death rates for amateur radio operators from 1979 to 1984. He showed an excess of leukemia deaths (over what would be expected from the general rate in the population) of 31 to (an expected) 24.3 in California (Washington wasn't large enough to be significant). Tumours and other lymphatic cancers were higher also, at 38, compared to (expected) 22.3. These figures were all highly significant. But most significant of all, was the acute form of Myelogeneous Leukemia (AML) which was nearly double -- 15 cases compared to 8.5 (expected). The total numbers were low, but the rise in the incidence and mortality among radio hams was highly significant. There are also many airforce and army studies which show increased rate of cancers among radio and radar operators. The Polish Miliary study in 1988 of 128,000 people, of whom 3700 were exposed to radio or radar, showed a 3-times increase in cancer incidence. And a more recent study of Norwegian female maritime radio operators revealed higher levels of breast cancer. Savitz and Calle looked at a series of eleven reports of workers who are exposed to electromagnetic fields, and they also showed a rise in general leukemias, with the AML form being especially significant. Telegraph, radio and radar operators had the highest levels here. Similar exposures are experienced by physiotherapists using radio-frequency (usually 27MHz) and microwave-frequency (915MHz and 2.4GHz) diathermy equipment, although typically they switch the gear on and leave the room -- so exposure times (for them) are short. Not all physios use this equipment. 42,403 female members of the profession were queried for pregnancy history. Miscarriages before seven weeks among those using the microwave diathermy equipment was very high (47.7% as against 14.5% for controls), while, among those using normal shortwave diathermy, the miscarriage rate was virtually the same as among non-users. I make this point to illustrate that these effects are not just with brain-tumours and leukemias, but across a range of conditions - and they appear to be frequency- and exposure-dependent, and mainly connected with DNA disruptions and supression of immune responses. Obviously genetic differences and other exposures also play a role. No one is talking about epidemics, but they are worried about increased levels of what have been, in the past, low-incident cancerous conditions. These appear to be rising at a regular rate. We just don't know what this means with 100 million people using cell phones over a lifetime. And I must say that I am amazed at the intellectual inertia (and outright denial) of technical people in resisting any suggestion that these potential major health problems should be treated seriously and researched vigorously. Stewart Fist, Technical writer and journalist. Current Australian columns: Archives of my columns are available at the Australian and also at the ABC site: Development site: Phone:+612 9416 7458 Fax: +612 9416 4582 Old Homepage: ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 16:15:50 -0500 From: Russell E. Sorber Subject: Re: Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone In article Joe Plescia writes: > Is there a device available that provides dial tone on a cell phone? Motorola Cellular Subscriber Group makes several devices that provide dial tone and a RJ-11 jack at one end and a cellphone connection at the other end. They are called "cellular connection interface boxes." They are often used to provide dial tone to burglar alarm dialers so they can dial out via cellular. There are several different kinds of boxes (and prices) depending on the type of cellular phone you have. Some dealers have these or you can order via Motorola Subscriber Group at 1-800-331-6456. Regards, Russ ------------------------------ From: sedgett@edgett.bc.ca (Simon Edgett) Subject: Re: Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone Date: 26 May 1997 15:52:02 GMT Organization: grouptelecom customer Joe Plescia (jplescia@plescia.com) wrote: > Is there a device available that provides dial tone on a cell phone? > I have the need for a device that would provide a dial tone to a > external device so that a regular telephone or fax machine could be > used. I do remember seeing a device, many moons ago at a construction > trade show, that connected to a GE 3000 cell phone that allowed > regular POTS phones to be used ... (the user picked up the phone, heard > a dialtone and dialed) ... I've used such a device on a Motorola Flip phone. Cost about $350 CAN. We use to use them to provide credit card terminals at trade shows. (I know, not the safest in the world) Worked fairly well. Have used them with fax machines and modems w/o much problem. Actually when I purchased the last one the cell co I bought it from told me about a setup they had assisted on. A fellow put in a whole system on his sailboat. An antenna was mounted on the top of the mast and this box was connected to his phone sitting in some cupboard. (Motorola bag phone if I recall) Then he had done local wiring through out the boat. Fax machine down below, cordless phone on deck so that he could use the reception of the antenna mounted on the mast as a handheld. He even had another small phone in the wheel house. I which I had seen that one. Cheers, Simon ------------------------------ From: Ken Subject: Central Office Photos Wanted Date: 26 May 1997 23:06:27 GMT Organization: Random Access Inc. +1 (800) 910-1190 I am looking for photos of central offices, ess, step, crossbar ... anything ... I want to start a web page dedicated to central offices and switching equipment ... Thanks, mailto:kw@randomc.com ------------------------------ From: ttonino@bio.vu.nl (Thomas Tonino) Subject: Re: Audio Monitoring When Phone is On Hook Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 20:51:33 +0100 S Hemphill wrote: [snip] > They simply, with your permission, activated a switch at the telephone > co., and they were able to hear inside your home through your phones > even though they were ON HOOK! What I want to know is, can this > actually be done??? Can my home be invaded through phones that are > HUNG UP? Yes they can. It depend on the phone model but the idea is this: Put a high frequency signal on the phone line. This signal will travel over the open hook switch, so a closed circuit forms. This signal is influenced by vibrations of the switch or the microphone. Dutch police was alleged to do this for listening in on suspects; would show up in reports as '... left the phone off hook accidentally and we overheard...'. Police denied, but hacker organization Hack-Tic gave a demonstration over a short line and publicized the schematic used. I still should have it around somewhere; it was not very complex, but wouldn't work on very long lines either. This equipment is not in standard phone offices, so it is not a matter of just throwing a switch. Thomas Tonino ------------------------------ From: Eric Ewanco Subject: Re: ISDN U Interface Wiring/Electrical Interface (High Rise Apartment) Date: 26 May 1997 19:06:00 -0400 Organization: US Robotics Thanks for all who wrote me advice on identifying the newly installed ISDN line on the six pairs which go to my junction box. Several people correctly pointed out that damage should only be expected when plugging a TA into a POTS line, not plugging a POTS phone into an ISDN line. A POTS phone on an ISDN line will give either hissing or clicking at one second intervals. So I plugged in a POTS phone and the pair I suspected gave me the clicking. One person also confirmed the voltage. The next day I got my I-modem TA, plugged it into the pair I had identified, and it works great. Of course NYNEX did not give me any assistance in this so good thing I found it. # __ __ Eric Ewanco # IC | XC eje@world.std.com # ---+--- http://www.wp.com/Eric_Ewanco # NI | KA Framingham, MA; USA ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: How Do You Dial a Vanity 800 Number? Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 16:04:34 -0400 Organization: Rockwell Collins, Inc. Reply-To: wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com > The letters Q and Z are normally not used in words forming phone > numbers. When they are used in other phone applications such as > voicemail, they are not standardized. Frequently the Q will appear > with the 1 and the Z with the zero, which instead of being zero > clicks is actually ten clicks. Sometimes Q and Z will both be with > the 1. You might want to check out the Telecom Archives file which > deals with 'words to numbers' in telephone numbers. PAT] On the rolm phone system here, the voice mail uses 7 for Q and 9 for Z. The logic being that "they are on the keys where they should logically go." of course, the initial questions about Q and Z were answered with the "logical" answer instead of telling us about 7 and 9 ... in the training class, i'd pointed out that my grandmother's phone in Terre Haute (way back when they had 5 digit dialing there) had QZ on the 1 and of course "they'd never heard of such a silly thing.." and by the time the phone system was "up", most had forgotten the training class answer anyway. Simply amazing how many people have Q and Z in the names ... not just as a first letter ... and since a feature was "dial by name" function, folks ran into the missing Q and Z more often than expected. Bill Newkirk Collins General Aviation Division Publications Department Rockwell Collins, Inc., Melbourne Florida wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: How Do You Dial a Vanity 800 Number? Date: 26 May 1997 15:00:14 -0400 Organization: BBN Planet, Cambridge, MA In article , PAT wrote: > The letters Q and Z are normally not used in words forming phone > numbers. When they are used in other phone applications such as > voicemail, they are not standardized. Frequently the Q will appear > with the 1 and the Z with the zero, which instead of being zero > clicks is actually ten clicks. Sometimes Q and Z will both be with > the 1. The phones on our AT&T PBX have the Q and Z included on the same key as the adjacent letters, so 7 = PQRS and 9 = WXYZ. Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com BBN Corporation, Cambridge, MA (BBN customers, call (800) 632-7638 option 1 for support) Support the anti-spam movement; see ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 20:27:38 -0700 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , nwdirect@netcom.com wrote: > From Reuters > AT&T Corp. said it plans to introduce a new toll-free prefix in one > year to meet a growing demand for toll-free services. A year ago, AT&T > created an 888 toll-free code to supplement a dwindling supply of 800 > numbers. The company said those new numbers are being consumed so > quickly that it is working to create another pool of available numbers > using an 877 code. "Of 7.78 million available combinations, 7.71 > million, or 99.9%, are working, reserved or otherwise taken from the > pool of available numbers," AT&T said of the original batch of 800 > numbers. The next code, 877, is scheduled to be operational by April > 4, 1998. I'm surprised that Reuters would publish such nonsense. *AT&T* didn't create 888, and it won't create 877. Bellcore, which has no connection at all to AT&T, serves as the administrator of the North American Numbering Plan, under which function it makes the decisions regarding activation of new toll-free codes. ** Do not spam e-mail me! ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best-com >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #133 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue May 27 03:05:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id DAA03772; Tue, 27 May 1997 03:05:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 03:05:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705270705.DAA03772@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #134 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 May 97 03:05:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 134 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Four-Year Recap Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone (Eric Kammerer) Re: MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals (Peter Morgan) Re: MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals (Dave Briggs) Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" (Barry Margolin) Re: Pooling Phone Numbers (Lee Winson) Cell Phones and Health Hazards (Erik Florack) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (Michael Hartley) Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming (John R. Covert) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Four-Year Recap Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 12:24:49 -0400 Organization: ICB Toll Free News Reply-To: joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com Only the foolishness of why, and how poorly, 888 and 877 were created, can be attributed to AT&T (and company.) Yesterday's {Washington Times} told the story of The Association of National Advertisers, representing 5,000 members, lobbying Congress to no avail against the 888 auction. Daniel Jaffe, association exec vp, complained, "We don't see anything wrong with paying a premium for vanity numbers, but a public auction will only artificially drive up prices beyond anything that's reasonable." Perhaps Mr. Jaffe's constituents, including many of their telecom execs who no doubt read this Digest, should have thought of that sooner, and lobbied at INC and SNAC for user interests. It is after all the Toll Free Industry Guidelines created by those forums, that lay out the anti-user policies (no proprietary interest, no buying and selling numbers, etc.) that is the foundation for the new FCC Toll Free Ruling (see Cover Story, ICB Toll Free News, http://www.icbtollfree.com), and the wide path it lays to the Congressional auction door. Here's a recap of tha past four years: 1993 - Portability was enacted in May, transferring control of toll-free numbers from carriers to users. Carriers reacted to this loss by pronouncing these numbers a fragile resource which required their "protection" in the name of public interest. Concurrently, they promoted number 'ownership' and number branding to major advertisers, all the while negating the same in industry forums and policy. Taking advantage of their exclusive access to the 800 database, they also filled their own 800 coffers to facilitate rolling out ever more proprietary products and services, creating an industry-induced shortage. 1995 - The carrier-induced shortage of 800 numbers was further exacerbated by their foolish band-aid introduction of 888 as a co-brand, rather than a separate domain. This attempt to cover-up carrier 800 warehousing proved as short-sighted as their anti-user 800 industry guidelines. The users are, after all, their customers. And, according to Mr. Jaffe above, they are not happy. 1995-96 - Advertisers and other users deluged the FCC with complaints that 888 would compromise both the utility and brand value of 800. The FCC responded by offering to 'set-aside' those 888's in question until 'right of first refusal' could be studied. The FCC also responded by instituting micromanagement of the toll-free industry, in a too-little too-late recognition of industry wrong-doing. (The FCC 800 Ruling, however, illustrates that the FCC has no problem relying on industry anti-user propaganda to form its policies regulating subscribers. How odd. Perhaps just convenient.) Finally, all the tumult woke up Congress, which erroneously saw a new revenue stream in these numbers. (Erroneously because Congress is clueless about the unique features and characteristics of toll-free numbers, and the degree to which they differ from other kinds of 'spectrum'.) Nonetheless, the 888 auction was borne. Unfortunately for advertisers, it's specifically the 888 numbers in the FCC 'set-aside' pool established to protect advertisers, that Congress wants to auction. The essence of the Toll Free Ruling is that it further moves toll-free number control, granted by portability, away from users, beyond carriers and now on to the government. With the FCC transferring much of anti-user voluntary industry guideline in federal law, the carriers can no longer choose so readily, which "preferred" advertisers to protect, because the government now holds toll-free numbers hostage to *it's* own interests. User (both corp telecom and corp adv mgt) political alliance with carriers, has backfired in their face. Judith Oppenheimer ICB TOLL FREE NEWS - 800/888/global800 news, analysis, advice. http://www.icbtollfree.com, mailto:news-editor@icbtollfree.com Judith Oppenheimer - 800 The Expert, ph 212 684-7210, fx 212 684-2714 mailto:j.oppenheimer@worldnet.att.net, mailto:icb@juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 97 08:15:45 PDT From: erick@sac.AirTouch.COM (Eric Kammerer) Subject: Re: Dial Tone Device For a Cell Phone > Is there a device available that provides dial tone on a cell phone? > I have the need for a device that would provide a dial tone to a > external device so that a regular telephone or fax machine could be > used. I do remember seeing a device, many moons ago at a construction > trade show, that connected to a GE 3000 cell phone that allowed > regular POTS phones to be used ... (the user picked up the phone, heard > a dialtone and dialed) ... The general category is called a Cellular Data Interface. Most cell phone manufacturer's have them. You should be able to get them from your cellular carrier, or a computer store. Some models include: Cellabs MiniJack Cellabs MiniDial Ora Cellular/Data Link Spectrum AXCELL NEC INT 4000 Fujitsu Pocket Data Interface II Motorola THE Portable Cellular Connection Interface Oki Data Link Direct Telular PCS ONE Audiovox STI-75 ------------------------------ From: Peter Morgan Subject: Re: MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 08:36:51 +0100 In message PAT wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can report it direct to the Federal > Communications Commission if you wish, but good luck in getting any > action taken. I would suggest you send them only the money actually > due, however you may wish to just put a freeze on payments to them > until they re-rate the calls and send a corrected bill. In the future Surely these companies send out written details of their tariff? Verbal promises are worthless - get them to fax/mail you to confirm the rates they've told you. Surely you can tell them to fax you and tell you their 800 number so you can agree to switch once you've had chance to look over the full terms of their deal? Something in writing gives you much better peace of mind, and can be used back to the company and to any authorities if you were accused of non-payment. I've only seen one company which had small print implying they could make changes to their rates without notifying customers -- I ignored them. In the UK, if any carrier was offering calls at a particularly attractive price, I know most people would get the information in writing. BT has a Pricing InformationService which sends out little booklets describing the national and international rates, and alternative companies (Mercury, ACC and Enegris, to name a few) would be completely ignored by individuals if they didn't give a price listing. AT&T refused to send me a tariff guide until I'd signed up, so I told them flatly that they must be mad to begin to believe people would sign up without knowing what they would charge or have rates changing without information about it, and they did eventually send some information (though not comprehensive). Peter ------------------------------ From: dbriggs@banet.com (Dave Briggs) Subject: Re: MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 02:38:04 GMT Organization: CampusMCI Reply-To: dbriggs@banet.com On Sat, 24 May 1997 22:49:56 -0700, joseph kim wrote: > Not only will I never use MCI again, I really DO NOT want to pay the > large bill that they have charged me. Can anyone direct me to some > consumer advocacy group or some agency to report this to? I would also > suggest to anyone out there to use extreme caution in dealing with MCI. Our firm has been using MCI for about six years and have been thoroughly pleased. The rates we were quoted have always been accurate and any disputes (which don't happen very often) with our invoices are handled in a quick manner. Over all we get good service from MCI. I am sorry to hear you had problems, but upon seeing your note I thought I would show there are some folks out there who do like MCI. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is better to go with a smaller > company or a reseller which appreciates your business. I have always > had very good luck with Frontier/Allnet. PAT] I have to disagree with you a littler here, Pat. Don't always assume that smaller means better. One of our divisions decided to go with a smaller company (Frontier actually) and within two months they were at my door requesting to be back on our MCI contract again. For residential customers maybe smaller IXC's are the way to go in some cases. Dave Briggs Telecom Director OLI Systems ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" Date: 27 May 1997 01:42:39 -0400 Organization: BBN Planet, Cambridge, MA In article , Anthony E. Siegman wrote: > Says the article: "Systems capable of calculating individual customer > profitability will make it possible, for example, to let > less-profitable customers sit on hold longer when they call into a > telephone center." There's nothing very new about this, except that it's automated. Many businesses already provide different services for different levels of customers. At a bank I used to use, you could get a "Plus" account if the total of all your (non-IRA) accounts (savings, checking, CD's) was more than a certain minimum, and this got some fees waved and I think entitled you to use of a 24-hour hotline. My employer (a tier-1 ISP providing commercial Internet connections) most of the large customers are designated "key" customers; there's a set of customer service reps dedicated to handling them, and management gets notified when there are problems affecting these customers. Such services are often implemented by giving the key customers a different phone number to call for service, so they bypass the regular queue. All that this bank is doing is detecting the customer category automatically based on CNID. Why do businesses provide better service to big customers? A satisfied customer is likely to increase his business with you. If a big customer increases his business by a certain percentage, that's worth much more than a small customer increasing his business by the same percentage. Assuming the average big customer does M times as much business as the average small customer, you would have to satisfy M as many small customers as big customers to result in the same increase in revenues. The math is simple: it's more cost-effective to give excellent service to a few big customers than lots of small customers. Of course, you can go too far. If you actually *neglect* the masses, you could lose the majority of your business. The trick is to provide good service to all customers, and provide even better service to the key customers. Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com BBN Corporation, Cambridge, MA Support the anti-spam movement; see ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: Re: Pooling Phone Numbers Date: 26 May 1997 23:47:51 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS > Penn. Public Utility Commission Seeks Alternative to New Area Codes > With pooling, the Number Plan Area coordinator would give out numbers > only as they were actually needed to serve customers. The above article also appeared in the {Philadelphia Inquirer}. I was very glad to see it, as for the first time it alerts consumers to the fact that the new area code split/overlay is largely due to competiting phone companies tying up 10,000 line blocks which they're nowhere near fully utilizing. The split of Philadelphia from 215 to 215/610 was not at all welcomed a few years ago. Now Bell Atlantic says multiple new area codes are required statewide and consumers are very upset--they expected the 215/610 split to carry them for many years. The PUC is having the "overlay vs. split" and both approaches have many critics. The PUC, as the article reported, is now looking at the pools themselves. Bell Atlantic's response was that its switches are not designed to accomodate other approaches and would require reprogramming. I suspect it would not be too difficult given everything is ESS nowadays. (However, Penna has a lot of small independent companies, I don't know what kind of gear they have.) A big question is: Who will pay for reprogramming/rewiring? Will it be existing Bell customers? Bell stockholders? The new carriers? IMHO, all costs should be paid by the new carriers. Their existence is responsible for this problem. They need the new infrastructure to support them. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, but when you ask the new competitors to do anything -- anything at all other than skim the cream -- they whine and complain about unfair everything is. They'd prefer that Bell simply hand them the keys and walk away, after paying all their bills first of course, and cleaning some of the deadbeats out of their customer base. Don't expect much of anything from the new carriers other than continued wasteful use of telephone numbers and degradation of the existing service. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 12:10:29 PDT From: Erik Florack Subject: Cell Phones and Health Hazards billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) says: > fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) wrote: >> Michael Wright (voe@telalink.net) writes: >>> There is no research out there that has established ANY causal >>> relationship between cell phones and brain tumors. >> Complete utter balderdash. Apparently this correspondent can't read. > Please point us (me) to the specific study or studies that hae made > such a conclusion. Just one of the ones I found. This one was obviously snanned in with a OCR. I've corrected the spelling where I've noted problems. From: http://www.shieldworks.com/rfread2.html The ANSI standard has accomplished its intended purpose, so far as cellular telephone users are concerned: their brain tissue is not being cooked! Instead, it seems to be developing cancer under conditions of long-term exposure to the near fields of these low-power transmitters. (The near field lies within a volume having a radius of 1/p2, 1 being the wavelength of the signal.) lhe frequency used by cellular telephone in the USA is in the vicinity of 900 MHz. What is the evidence from elsewhere in the electromagnetic spectrum? In an earlier article (Network News, Holiday Issue 1994), I discussed the historical rise in the incidence of childhood brain cancer suggestive of an urban source that became active in the 1920's, which is when commercial radio broadcasting began in the USA. lhe frequencies employed were in the kilo- and megahertz regions, which are below those now being used for cellular telephones. 'His evidence is suggestive of an association between childhood brain cancer and the fields around amplitude-modulated radio transmitters, but is far &om conclusive. On the other hand, it is quite consistent with the concept that prolonged exposure to the near field of a radio-frequency source is carcinogenic, because these wavelengths are on the order of a mile-long, which means that people living anywhere within 0.15 miles of such a transmitter would be living in its near field. So the evidence from lower radio frequencies is consistent with the concept that the major carcinogenic hazard from a transmitter resides within its near field. ------&<---snip Although the demand for cellular phone service is at a fever pitch, the service providers are encountering obstacles to building the cell sites that are the backbone of their network. A profound global concern has developed over the health and safety issues surrounding proximity to cellular facilities as well as fears of tumbling property values.These fears are not unfounded. A recent study carried out in Sydney, Australia found that children who live in the shadow of television broadcast towers had more than twice the rate of leukemia than those with homes further away from the antennas. "The radio &equency (RF) and microwave (MW) radiation exposures in the study are similar to those emitted by cellular facilities and were up to 1,000 times below many current RF/MW health standards. Dr. Vera Garaj-Vrhovac and co-workers at the University of Zagreb in Croatia, found abnormalities in block lymphocyte chromosomes in Yugoslavia microwave workers. The workers exposure had been over a period of eight to twenty-five years with intensities that are approximately one percent of that currently allowed by the FCC. The same research produced similar chromosome abnormalities in laboratory cultures of mammalian cells at levels of only one-twentieth of the limit currently allowed by the FCC. The length of time these workers were exposed brings home the point that long term, low level effects are cumulative and would similarly affect anyone living near a RF or MW transmitter, such as radar, radio, television or cellular phone towers. The same issue of low level long term exposure was identified as a determining factor in the work of Terry Thomas and co-workers at the National Cancer Institute. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 18:38:00 +0100 From: Michael Hartley Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roamin In message jfmezei wrote: > Furthermore, one must question how much it costs to rent a telephone > without service vs renting one with a local service package. Not all > rental shops at airports may be willing to rent you a telephone > without a sim card (service). Perhaps this will change, or perhaps > this is only isolated cases in certain countries. If only the US had adopted the same frequency and standards as (most of) the rest of the world. More from the UK ... > With so many of the phones being tied to a particular network, and the > GSM networks here operating on two separate frequency allocations (900 > MHz for Cellnet + Vodafone, 1800 MHz for Orange and one2one) I doubt > that many non-UK SIM cards would work ... and you'd find the UK > network operator has no agreement with your home SIM card issuer. Vodafone do operate SIM roaming with one of the US networks, as do Cellnet. It costs a fortune, and I'm not sure which network(s) they have agreements with, or if the arrangement is reciprocal. Check out the web sites, I'm sure they'll make a big splash of it: Cellnot advertised US roaming on UK TV recently but interestingly only added the 'remember to buy or hire a US compatible phone first' warning a few weeks into the campaign (hmm, wonder why they did that. ;=) ) > The networks, as well as being on different frequencies, have had some > different target users -- the lower freq ones offer more international > roaming, True for the moment as there aren't too many 1800 networks around. However dual band phones are very close so you can expect the one2one and Orange to give the other two another good run for their money. Mike Hartley ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 May 97 08:31:38 EDT Subject: Re: GSM, SIM Cards, International Roaming From: John R. Covert jfmezei wrote: > Furthermore, one must question how much it costs to rent a telephone > without service vs renting one with a local service package. Not all > rental shops at airports may be willing to rent you a telephone > without a sim card (service). The North American GSM subscriber wishing to travel abroad should rent the phone before leaving home from his own carrier. Not only is this much more convenient than having to find the rental shop in a foreign airport, it can also be much cheaper. Omnipoint will rent European phones to its subscribers for $40/month, $70 for three months, and $100 for six months. Compare that to the typical rental shop rate of $90 for the first week and $200 per month and you can pay your year's GSM contract with two short foreign trips! There is the advantage that incoming calls with an in-country SIM card will be charged to the caller, but the disadvantage that you will have to communicate a new number to your correspondents each trip rather than just having them call your home number. Omnipoint's incoming rate while roaming in most of western Europe and major Asian business centers is only $0.99, total price including LD. See www.omnipoint.com. jfmezei is in Canada, so his local carrier is MicroCell Fido. They don't yet have any operational roaming agreements outside North America, but have signed agreements with France and Switzerland and should have them running soon; see www.fido.ca. P Morgan wrote from the UK ... > With so many of the phones being tied to a particular network, and the > GSM networks here operating on two separate frequency allocations (900 > MHz for Cellnet + Vodafone, 1800 MHz for Orange and one2one) I doubt > that many non-UK SIM cards would work ... and you'd find the UK > network operator has no agreement with your home SIM card issuer. That's really not going to be the case. As I've mentioned earlier, Omnipoint already has an operational agreement with Vodaphone -- I've used it; it really works. And since Omnipoint will be the _only_ GSM carrier in New York City, it will be to the advantage of all four UK carriers to get agreements with Omnipoint. Cellnet has already signed, but haven't gone operational, and at least one of the 1800 MHz carriers is working on an agreement with Omnipoint, both probably will. It is to their advantage to be able to offer U.S. roaming to their customers. Since it will be the case in North America that each geographic area will typically only have one single GSM carrier (the other 1900 MHz carriers are in most cases using North American specific technology) every GSM carrier elsewhere in the world will be arranging roaming with the GSM carriers in North America. Canada, for example, will only have Fido, nationwide. Even within Europe the 1800/900 barrier is being broken, with the 1800 MHz carriers rapidly establishing roaming agreements with the 900 MHz carriers in other countries. They have to do this in order to attract local customers as well as to get some of the traffic from visiting roamers. An example of this can be seen with eplus in Germany, the 1800 MHz operator, who have established roaming agreements with 900 MHz companies in several countries, and are offering a phone they call the "Traveler" which supports both 900 and 1800 MHz (looks like probably the Motorola 8800 from the picture on their web site). Their web site is www.eplus.de. They say that they already have agreements with 900 MHz carriers in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, Spain, and Greece, and are working on agreements in Italy, France, Turkey, Luxembourg, Sweden, Ireland, Norway, and Portugal. They have had to establish these 900 MHz agreements, because they only have 1800 MHz agreements in England and Switzerland as well as the Helsinki area (900 needed in Finland outside Helsinki) and Singapore. Sometime in the second quarter they expect to add the 1800 MHz carrier in France (note they already have the 900!) as well as Hongkong and Malaysia. The clear plan for GSM is for every carrier to establish a roaming agreement with every other carrier not operating in its own geographic area. Everywhere in the world, and regardless of the frequency band in use. /john ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #134 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed May 28 23:06:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA19679; Wed, 28 May 1997 23:06:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 23:06:09 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705290306.XAA19679@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #135 TELECOM Digest Wed, 28 May 97 23:05:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 135 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Need Help Dealing With Ameritech (Jeff Allen) UCLA Short Course on "Fiber Optic ICs for Gigabit Ethernet" (Bill Goodin) UCLA Short Course on "Wireless Multimedia Communications" (Bill Goodin) Book Review: "SGML on the Web: Small Steps Beyond HTML" (Rob Slade) AT&T, Pac Tel, SW Bell to Merge? (Tad Cook) New AT&T Calling Card Rates (Dave Stott) True AT&T Promo: 5cpm (Tel-One Network Services) Krazy Kevin Sued by New York Attorney General (Peter Juhl) PC/Cellular - Help ! (scicluna@imaginet.fr) Remote Access Study (Adam R. Jung) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 28 May 1997 17:09:19 PDT From: Jeff Allen Subject: Need Help Dealing With Ameritech Reply-To: Jeff Allen I work for WebTV Networks. As I am sure you know, the boxes owned by our customers attempt to make only local calls, or at least warn them before making toll calls. When our database (which we purchase from CCMI) is out of tune with reality, our customers sometimes get charged for calls which they weren't warned about. This makes them mad, and they call me. (Well, to be precise, they get escalated to me.) Anyway, I usually solve these things by talking with the local telco's billing department and getting the confirmation from them about the actual rating of the call. Because many of our POP numbers are provided by very new competitive exchanges (MFS, PacWest, and Eastern Telelogic, among others) there are often billing errors that can be ironed out pretty quickly by the business office. There are, of course, also CCMI errors that we prompt them to correct. All this is tedius and annoying, but it generally works OK. However, I have been totally unable to get anywhere on an increasing number of complaints coming from Ameritech customers. The problem is that apparently Ameritech's business office has been given strict orders not to make any comments about the cost of a call (what band it's in, timed/untimed, _anything_) about calls from Ameritech exchanges to MFS/Intellinet exchanges. They say that calls to an exchange operated by MFS are priced by MFS, and that Ameritech has nothing to do with billing for the call. Of course, when I talk to MFS they say this is insane: the originating carrier charges, if the call needs to be charged at all. And only the originating carrier will know whether or not the tariff says the call is timed. I called the PUC and got some Office of Executive Appeals. Then I got some nice lady who promised to find the right person to find out why it was impossible to simply verify the price of a call. Eventually I got help from a guy who told me that I simply needed to have the billing office conference me to the local operator. But I had no luck with that, and he basically agreed that it was impossible to find out if a given call between Ameritech and MFS was timed or not. I will be calling the nice lady back soon and telling her the guy was not at all helpful. I'm at wit's end. I need two answers, and I don't know where to look for them. First, I need to know why it is that Ameritech is unwilling to confirm what band a call is in, if and only if it's to an MFS exchange. Second, I need to know, in general, how I can find out if a call from an Ameritech exhcange to an MFS one is timed or not. I'd be eternally grateful for whatever light you can shed on this issue. Jeff R. Allen | jra@corp.webtv.net (work) WebTV Networks, Inc. | jeff.allen@acm.org (personal) Service Operations Toolsmith | http://www.webtv.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: While this is not intended to excuse Ameritech in any way, I suggest you may be able to find out what you want by getting copies of the tariff for yourself and reading them. Ameritech cannot forbid you to have copies of the tariffs and in fact must have them available for review by the public at some public location. If you can get the competitors you use to tell you where the exchanges assigned to them are located, it should be too hard at that point to relate each of those (competitive) exchanges to the comparable geographic area of Ameritech. Very likely those would be local and untimed calls. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Fiber Optic ICs for Gigabit Ethernet" Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 11:54:09 -0700 On August 25-27, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Fiber Optic ICs for Gigabit Ethernet", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bahram Jalali, PhD, Associate Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA; Anthony F.J. Levi, PhD, Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, USC; and Ty Yoon, MS, Senior Design Manager, Fiber IC. Since 1984, Ethernet has revolutionized the way in which we communicate and conduct business. The mammoth growth in the number of nodes worldwide, in addition to fundamental changes in the format of electronic communication, is fueling the evolution of the Ethernet. Several factors highlight the need for a drastic increase in bandwidth, and are responsible for the current effort to develop the Gigabit Ethernet: the rapid growth in multimedia communication over the Ethernet is causing severe traffic problems; a large number of Fast Ethernet (100Mbit/s) switches are being deployed and Gbit/s links are needed to connect them together and to servers; the processing power of personal computers has doubled every 18 months--today, a PCI bus in a modern PC is capable of producing Gbit/s bursts of data. In light of these emerging trends, Gigabit Ethernet is the networking technology of choice. It is a straightforward and low-risk evolution of the Fast Ethernet network and is based on a familiar and proven networking protocol. It is expected to be cheaper than other alternative networks, such as the 622Mbit/s ATM, and is better suited for IP-based applications. This course addresses how the emergence of Gigabit Ethernet underscores the need for low-cost ICs running at Gbit/s data rates. It begins with an overview of Gigabit Ethernet at the networking level and defines the specification for electronic and optoelectronic components in the system. Various semiconductor IC technologies are considered and a detailed comparison in terms of cost and performance is made, followed by a review of the state-of-the-art Gbit/s communication ICs and optoelectronic devices. The course presents detailed circuit architectures for various components, and optimum circuit architectures and design methodologies, as well as design examples, are examined. One of the exciting new developments in circuit design is Gbit/s analog ICs made possible with the state-of-the-art scaled CMOS technologies. Extensive coverage of the Gbit/s CMOS IC technology as well as issues related to packaging and testing of high-speed communication circuits are provided. The course fee is $1295, which includes extensive course materials. These notes are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional 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: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Wireless Multimedia Communications" Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 12:03:04 -0700 On August 25-27, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Wireless Multimedia Communications", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Ellen Wesel, PhD, Senior Scientist, Hughes Communications; and Richard Wesel, PhD, Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA. Each participant receives the text, "Wireless Multimedia Communications: Networking Video, Voice and Data", E. Wesel (Addison-Wesley 1997), and lecture notes. New applications have defined the need for high data rate systems carrying multimedia traffic. Users enjoying multimedia applications such as video conferencing, advanced web-browsing, and interactive games on their desktop computers want to extend that capability to mobile environments. Wireless networks support mobility. They allow instant access to the files on your desktop, the library, and other users in all types of indoor or outdoor environments. This course provides an introduction to the problems and solutions of communicating multimedia traffic at high data rates over a radio channel. The lectures focus on explaining concepts, and introduce mathematical derivations only to explain details of the phenomenon or to allow application of the concept. Participants explore the building blocks of wireless multimedia systems, starting with the physical layer of the Open Systems Interface (OSI) stack and modeling the radio channel impairments, including path loss and multipath. The course includes the infrared and satellite wireless channels, and introduces the digital modulation approaches used to convey information over these channels. Participants explore block, convolutional, concatenated, and turbo codes over fading channels, and discuss lossy and lossless compression to send more data over the radio channel's finite bandwidth. Wireless communications are vulnerable to eavesdropping, and the lectures cover some of the privacy and authentication approaches used to make the link private and secure. The course evaluates medium access control (MAC) protocols such as time-division multiple access (TDMA), frequency-division multiple access (FDMA), code-division multiple access (CDMA), and carrier-sense multiple access (CSMA) in terms of their performance in carrying multimedia traffic over wireless channels. Network issues such as multihop, roaming, and routing are briefly mentioned. As asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) becomes an important protocol over the wired backbone, researchers have extended its services to the wireless link. The course discusses some of the possible approaches to support wireless ATM. Finally, the course reviews current spectrum and inter-national standardization activities in the context of FCC and ITU regulatory functions, and provides examples of existing radio, infrared and satellite systems. The course fee is $1195, which includes the course text and extensive course materials. These notes are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional 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. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 10:49:22 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "SGML on the Web: Small Steps Beyond HTML" BKSWSSBH.RVW 970226 "SGML on the Web Small Steps Beyond HTML", Yuri Rubinsky/Murray Maloney, 1997, 0-13-519984-0, U$44.95/C$62.95 %A Yuri Rubinsky %A Murray Maloney %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1997 %G 0-13-519984-0 %I Prentice Hall %O U$44.95/C$62.95 +1-201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131 beth_hespe@prenhall.com %P 499 %S Charles F. Goldfarb Series on Open Information Management %T "SGML on the Web Small Steps Beyond HTML" HTML (HyperText Markup Language) is written in SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language). SGML's most successful, or certainly most widely known, application is HTML. This book starts by using a simplified version of HTML as an example of the construction of an SGML DTD (Document Type Definition). Having established the basics, the book goes on to show how SGML can be used to define extensions to HTML, or simply create more advanced types of documents. For those who already know HTML, this provides a very clear introduction to advanced document handling. (And these days, who doesn't know HTML?) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKSWSSBH.RVW 970226 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ Subject: AT&T, Pac Tel, SW Bell to Merge? Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 23:59:18 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Phone giants AT&T and SBC in merger talks NEW YORK (AP) -- Telecommunications giants AT&T Corp. and SBC Communications Corp. are in talks to join forces in a $50 billion merger that would be the largest in history, {The Wall Street Journal} reported today. People close to the talks warned that such a deal would face numerous obstacles from regulators and competitors, including a federal ban on SBC's competing in the long-distance market until its own local market opens to competitors, the newspaper said. SBC had no comment, spokesman Larry Solomon said today in San Antonio. The company owns Southwestern Bell and Pacific Telesis and provides local phone service to seven of the 10 largest U.S. cities. Added AT&T spokeswoman Ruthlyn Newell: "As a matter of policy, we don't comment on rumors or speculation about mergers, acquisitions, divestitures or other business combinations." Combined, AT&T and SBC would have $80 billion a year in revenues, 230,000 workers, 60 percent of the $80 billion long-distance market, and virtual control over local phone and wireless services throughout the Southwest and California. Such a merger could make it harder for smaller telecommunications companies to build global networks, and hit hard the new concerns that have invested billions to gain wireless licenses or provide Internet access, the Journal said. The proposed merger would be the first joining of AT&T and a regional Bell phone company since the landmark breakup of the former American Telephone and Telegraph Co. in 1984. AT&T stock was up 3.8 percent on the report, rising $1.37 1/2 per share to $37.50 in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange. SBC was up 1.5 percent, or 87 1/2 cents at $57.75. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 17:26:20 -0700 From: Dave Stott Reply-To: dstott@mtg.com Organization: MTG Subject: New AT&T Calling Card Rates Pat, In today's (5/28/97) {Wall Street Journal}, page C5, there appears a "Notice to AT&T Customers." Here are the general changes -- my questions are in parentheses. Basically AT&T is changing calling card calls for both customer and operator dialed calls to $0.35 per minute, regardless of time or distance. (I wonder if that includes intraLATA calls?) On calling card calls placed via 1-800-CALLATT and billed to an AT&T card, the service charge drops from $0.90 to $0.35 per call. If you use another method for accessing the AT&T network (1-800-321-0288?), the charge drops from $0.90 to $0.60. If you bill to a LEC calling card (can you still do that? Where?) the fee drops from $1.20 per call to $0.60 per call. Finally, if you access their network other than 1-800-CALLATT and bill to a LEC card, the fee is now $0.95. ------------------------------ From: telone@shout.net (Tel-One Network Services) Subject: True AT&T Promo: 5cpm Date: 28 May 1997 22:05:26 GMT Organization: Tel-One Network Services The following is the scanned version of the most recent AT&T tariff containing a promotion for California subscribers called "Green Sense". Do you think they got that campaign from Sprint? Note: THIS IS an actual AT&T Tariff which was sent to our office as part of the Public Utility Commission's requirement that they send to all competiting entities, so it's genuine and *not* a reseller's promotion of an SDN plan: -- CUT here --- AT&T Communications of California, Inc. SCHEDULE CAL.P.U.C.NO. A13-T San Francisco, California 2nd Revised Sheet 42 Cancels lst Revised Sheet 42 Network Services Tariff A13. CONSUMER COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES PROMOTIONS 13.1 GENERAL REGULATIONS RULE NO. 27 - PROMOTIONAL OFFERINGS (Cont'd) 13.1.38 AT&T Green Sense Promotion Effective December 20, 1996, through July 31, 1997, Residential Customers can enroll in this promotion, which is an add-on to Interstate's AT&T Green Sense Promotion or AT&T Green Sense II Promotion. All terms and conditions are contained in AT&T's Tariff F.C.C. No. 27. During this promotion, the following rates are applicable to eligible calls all day, seven days a week, for both the initial and additional minutes. CLASS RATE PER MINUTE SERVICE CHARGE Dial Station $ .05 - interLATA calls None $ .05 - intraLATA calls None Card Calls $ .25 - interLATA calls $ .25 $ .20 - intraLATA calls $ .20 This promotion is available where facilities and billing capabilities permit. Advice Letter No. 1076 Issued by Date Filed: May 27, 1997 Decision No. M. D. Hovermale Effective: Jun. 01, 1997 Resolution No. District Manager ------------------------------ From: Peter Juhl Subject: Krazy Kevin Sued by New York Attorney General Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 08:40:11 +0200 Found on http://www.fraud.org/report.htm, about actions takenby FTC against magazine "sellers", 2. Kevin Jay Lipsitz, of Staten Island, NY, doing business as Collegtown Magazine Subscription Services, Krazy Kevin's Magazine Club, Magazine Club Inquiry Center, Tempting Tear-outs, and SI Mag Sub Service, Inc. The New York Attorney General alleges that Lipsitz deceptively offers discount magazine subscriptions via unsolicited e-mail but never places the subscription orders with the publishers or does so only after an extensive delay. peter [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We have known for a few years now how sleazy Kevin is. The sad part is when I posted on him in great detail a couple years ago while the Digest was being published at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, Kevin's response was to go on a major attack at the university level, literally calling trustees at their homes at night, etc. I reported here that Kevin was posting messages with forged headers claiming to be from a female 'university student' in some foreign country -- 'she' was always part of some 'student association' -- with the gist of the message always being that the students in that foreign country loved to read American magazines and that they had found a 'great company' in Staten Island, NY which gave them as students very good deals. I reported then that he was as bogus as a three dollar bill and I published several **PUBLIC RECORDS** of the City and State of New York regards Kevin. That is when he went on the attack against me and this Digest, and tried everything in his power to get all my accounts turned off, etc. It is unfortunate that Northwestern University gave any credence at all to his complaints. With a little luck, maybe he will get some prison time, or at least some heavy-duty probation. PAT] ------------------------------ From: scicluna@imaginet.fr (scicluna) Subject: PC/Cellular - Help ! Date: Wed, 28 May 97 19:07:29 GMT Organization: ImagiNET Reply-To: scicluna@imaginet.fr Bonjour, We are a French/American team conducting a project of bungalow hotel on the southern coast of Guatemala. As we do not get any tel facilities there and than we DO need tel/fax/internet services, we plan to use a computer connected to a cellular phone. We plan to buy both PC and tel. material in USA. We must solve two problems: -1-Do we find cellular phone suitable with the Guatemalan standard (800-AMPS) on sales in USA. -2-Does a "standard" PC (portable) can be protected from the very salty humidity existing in this zone? I mean a simple protection evoiding special and very expensive "tropicalized" PC. Could someone help? Thanks in advance, Frederic ------------------------------ From: Adam R. Jung Subject: Remote Access Study Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 12:59:07 -0700 Organization: Wolfe Internet Access, L.L.C. Good day to everyone! Here is your chance to spread your knowledge and help shape future enterprise-level remote access product offerings! Our organization, BrandSolutions (out of Seattle, WA) is conducting an industry study on remote access products. More specifically, we are looking to talk to companies that currently own, or have considered purchasing, a REMOTE ACCESS CONCENTRATOR (aka ACCESS SWITCH). A remote access concentrator (RAC) is considered to be a high port density version of a REMOTE ACCESS SERVER designed to support over 24 simultaneous remote users. We are talking to MIS professionals from around the country. As an honorarium for your valuable opinions and insights, we are offering $50 for participation in the study. All that is involved is a brief 20 minute phone conversation. We will also provide for you an executive summary of the findings of the study. These insights will help you benchmark your situation and needs compared to others in similar situations. To contribute your knowledge to the study, please email us at ajung@brand.com, or call (206) 284-5060 to set up a convenient time to have the discussion. Thanks so much! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #135 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu May 29 09:04:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA15862; Thu, 29 May 1997 09:04:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 09:04:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705291304.JAA15862@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #136 TELECOM Digest Thu, 29 May 97 09:04:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 136 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 60,000 "No-AOL" Addresses... $59.95 (Jay R. Ashworth) Possible Spam Legal Action (Chaim Frenkel) Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? (Robert A. Pierce) Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? (jfmezei) Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? (John R. Levine) Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? (Jim Youll) Spammer Getting More Sophisticated (Linc Madison) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (Hillary Gorman) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (Chris Farrar) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (John Cropper) Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam (Diablo Cat) Anti-Spam Coalition Itself a Fraud (Tom Betz) Warning: Scam Alert (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Jay R. Ashworth Subject: 60,000 "No-AOL" Addresses ... $59.95 Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 20:19:20 EDT This just arrived in my mailbox. Sallynet is, of course, a customer of AGIS, whether or not they're related to Spamford. One point was, however, quite interesting. Windsea wrote: > From windsea@rose.sallynet.com Wed May 28 19:55:30 1997 > From: Windansea Publishing > To: windsea@windansea1.com > Message-ID: > Date: Wed, 28 May 97 16:54:38 EST > Subject: 60,000 "No-AOL" Addresses... $59.95 > Reply-To: windsea@windansea1.com > Comments: Authenticated sender is > _/_/_/ NEW! 600k "AOL-Free" E-Mail List _/_/_/ > As you may be aware, AOL has implemented a filter that > blocks *any* domain that send more than 500k through > their system. Since the majority of lists contain as high > as 75% AOL addresses, what are you paying for? > Don't leave your business high and dry... get the newly > released 600k "AOL-Free" E-Mail Hot List now! > [x] Hot, responsive names culled from our own list, as well > as home and small business Web sites from the four > corners of the Net! > [x] No AOL addresses (now blocking bulk mail) > [x] No Compuserve addresses (also blocking bulk mail) > [x] Fresh! Approx. 60 days old Phew! > [x] No Genie addresses > [x] No .EDU, .ORG, .GOV, .JP, .DE or .NO addresses > [x] High deliverability, awesome response Yup... the response will, no doubt, be awesome. > [x] Filtered against the infamous "Blue List of Internet > Whiners, Complainers and Troublemakers" This was the kicker. Gee. I wonder how one joins? :-) > [x] One-address-per-line format, .zip files > [x] FAST DELIVERY! No waiting for snail mail--you receive > download instructions by e-mail to as soon as your order > is processed! > _/_/_/_/ LIMITED TIME OFFER _/_/_/_/ > Don't wait--take advantage of this red-hot list before your > competitors do... only $59.95! > To order the 600k "AOL-Free" E-Mail List with your Visa or > MasterCard: > 1. Order online NOW, at http://www.windansea1.com/noaol.htm > 2. Telephone Orders call 619-558-0756 > Or send check or money order for $59.95 to: > Windansea Publishing > 8070 La Jolla Shores Drive, Suite 243 > La Jolla, CA 92037 > *** As soon as your order has been processed, you will receive > download instructions by e-mail *** Too bad they didn't include an 800 number. I'da called; wouldn't you? Interestingly enough, I started flying my new domain in my sig files, but _not_ in any headers, about 3 weeks ago. So far, no spam. Are the rumors false? Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth High Technology Systems Consulting Ashworth Designer Linux: Where Do You Want To Fly Today? & Associates ka1fjx/4 "...short of hiring the Unabomber, how can I +1 813 790 7592 jra@baylink.com get back at them?" --Andy Cramer NIC: jra3 ------------------------------ Subject: Possible Spam Legal Action From: Chaim Frenkel Date: 28 May 1997 22:39:09 -0400 During the course of an email exchange, a fellow from Houston, TX pointed me to a page: http://lonestar.texas.net/~tv2go/penalcode.htm And claimed that the owner of the page is or has filed charges. Just thought you might be interested. Given the number of telcom subscribers, there must be a few from the Lone Star State. Hope this helps, Chaim Frenkel Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc. chaimf@cris.com +1-718-236-0183 ------------------------------ From: no-spam@pobox.com (Robert A. Pierce) Subject: Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 14:44:59 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. Reply-To: no-spam@pobox.com Hello! I recently received this junk mail: > From: steve@sprynet.com > Date sent: Wed, 14 May 1997 20:55:22 -0700 > To: XXXXXXXX@YYY.ZZZ > Subject: Hi > Robert, > Hi, > How would you like to advertise over the internet to thousands and thousands > of people? > It is VERY EASY AND VERY CHEAP. Our Prices are very low (around $25 > per 10-15 thousand people.) > For more info please email our autoresponder PAYPHONE@ANSWERME.COM > You will get your info via email within 2 minutes depending on how > fast your mail server is. So I sent mail to payphone@answerme.com with FROM: and REPLY-TO: set to postmaster@localhost. At the time, I did not know that Mr. Wallace's company was involved -- I thought answerme.com might be a 'vanity url.' I also don't know why the message used my first name -- are they sorting these things manually or automatically? I have two questions: One, did that cause PAYPHONE to send mail to postmaster@answerme.com, or would they have set up a filter to prevent that? Two, if they haven't set up a filter to prevent looping, would it make sense to send e-mail to one junk mailer's autoresponder with a reply-to of another autoresponder? Are there other autoresponders or other interesting addresses at the domains listed below? Rob Pierce no-spam@pobox.com (yeah, it's real :] ) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: An excellent idea! Let's get the various autoresponders started going after each other. Take any two spammers and create a set of mail headers showing each of them as the 'From:' and 'Reply-To:' on the other set of headers. Now each time you get any spam at all, just toss it to a script which places the above headers on the mail and sends it back out. It would help if you are (for sendmail purposes) a trusted user in the sendmail.cf; this will let you totally remove any reference to yourself at all, thus preventing the autoresponders from finding out about you and getting you back in the loop somehow. Be sure to do cc: to a few postmasters, Spamford and whoever else you feel should receive the message several thousand times during the over- night hours. Typically when my autoreply gets caught in a loop with someone else's, I get anywhere from two to three thousand transactions before I catch it and kill the jobs. See how many pieces of mail you can cause to happen (in a loop which involves them -- not yourself!) before they notice it and have to clean up a mess. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jfmezei Subject: Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 13:00:12 -0500 Organization: SPC Reply-To: "jfmezei"@videotron.ca.[no.spam] Interesting that you couldn't traceroute all the way to the end: For me, it works fine: Find route to: cyberpromo.com. (205.199.212.36), Max 30 hops, 40 byte packets (local hops omitted for brevity) 6 sl-pen-2-f3/0-100m.sprintlink.net. (144.232.0.122): 716 ms 861 ms 911 ms 7 f1-0.pennsauken1.agis.net. (192.157.69.19): 911 ms 873 ms 901 ms 8 a0.58.philadelphia1.agis.net. (206.185.158.9): 1044 ms 935 ms 893 ms 9 cyberpromo.philadelphia1.agis.net. (206.185.158.2): 1230 ms 954 ms 850 ms 10 spamford.com. (205.199.212.36): 1028 ms 653 ms 384 ms Trace completed savetrees.com also points to spamford.com ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 1997 00:56:21 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Spamford appears to be multi-homed, if the research I have done is any > indication. Cyber Promo seems to be doing most of their spamming at this point via their "bandwidth partner" IDCI, who is a CWI customer. If you complain to IDCI, you'll get a sanctimonous form letter about how they don't censor their customers, freedom of speech, etc. Speaking of sanctimonious, check out AGIS new press release at http://www.agis.net/press26.htm in which AGIS says that they and their spam customers have agreed to stop spamming until the IEMMC's opt-out system is running. Lest you confuse their statements with the truth, you might want to consider that I've logged 27 spam attempts today from Integrated Media, one of the spam havens that is allegedly going to stop. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ From: jim@newmediagroup.com (Jim Youll) Subject: Re: Spamford Getting Service From Cable & Wireless? Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 21:28:27 -0400 Organization: New Media Group, Inc. Babu Mengelepouti wrote: > Spamford appears to be multi-homed, if the research I have done is any > indication. > But wait? Is Spamford multihoming? A Cable & Wireless Class C block! Well, yes. There is no mystery there. > Whois: net 207.124.161 > Cable & Wireless, Inc. (NETBLK-NET3-CWI-NET) NET3-CWI-NET > 207.124.0.0 - > 207.124.255.255 > IDCI (NETBLK-CWI-IDCI2) CWI-IDCI2 207.124.160.0 - > 207.124.164.255 > IDCI (NETBLK-IDCI-BLK-11) IDCI-BLK-11 207.124.161.0 - > 207.124.162.255 > What is IDCI, I wonder? IDCI is an internet provider based in New Jersey that gets is backbone link from Cable & Wireless. Plug in NETBLO-IDCI-BLK-11 on your whois and learn the rest. > This one doesn't resolve either. > > 1 532 ms 188 ms 168 ms Max18.Seattle.WA.MS.UU.NET [207.76.5.24] > 2 1284 ms 2128 ms 2321 ms Ar1.Seattle.WA.MS.UU.NET [207.76.5.3] > 3 3037 ms 2575 ms 453 ms Fddi0-0.CR1.SEA1.Alter.Net > [137.39.33.41] > 4 634 ms 475 ms 241 ms 110.Hssi4-0.CR1.TCO1.Alter.Net > [137.39.69.121] > 5 887 ms 1357 ms 929 ms 313.atm1-0.gw1.tco1.alter.net > [137.39.21.153] > 6 508 ms 447 ms 260 ms cwix2-gw.customer.ALTER.NET > [137.39.184.82] > 7 284 ms 275 ms 270 ms nyd-7513-1-h4-0.cwix.net > [207.124.104.50] > 8 610 ms 495 ms * ny1-7000-02-f0/0.cwi.net > [205.136.191.228] > 9 300 ms 264 ms 683 ms ny1-7000-01-f4/0.cwi.net > [205.136.191.227] > 10 621 ms 233 ms 275 ms idci-cwi.cwi.net [205.136.226.210] > 11 275 ms 250 ms 767 ms phl-bcn1-client-router.idci.net > [205.136.21.3] > 12 648 ms 954 ms 647 ms 146.145.254.58 > 13 * * * Request timed out. > 14 * * * Request timed out. > 15 * * * Request timed out. > 16 * * * Request timed out. This route from phl-bcn1... is the path that was used in another fraudulent multi-thousand-message run which happened 5/26. My name appeared on tens of thousands (apparently) of messages, and as well, the server at the end of your trace above (the machine that's not showing on the trace) started hitting our system with > 6 messages/second nonstop. Can't say much more about that just now. ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Spammer Getting More Sophisticated Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 20:27:35 -0700 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! I got an e-mail spam a couple of weeks ago, I honestly don't remember what about, with an 800 number. I keep a little list of the 800 numbers of people who send me e-mail spam, just in case I feel a sudden need for product information as I walk home past the rows and rows of COCOTs. This one number that's on my current list, though, has taken a little bit different tactic. If you dial 1-800-555-2312 from a payphone, you will get a recorded message informing you that "These services are not available from public phones." What discrimination! Surprisingly enough, every single COCOT I tried, even the ones that I seriously doubt are well programmed or well maintained, got the same rejection message. Damned shame, that. But then again, that's what large PBXs are for. ** Do not spam e-mail me! ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best-com >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << ------------------------------ From: hillary@hillary.net (Hillary Gorman) Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: 28 May 1997 19:56:39 GMT Organization: Packet Shredders Anonymous In , John McNamee wrote: >> Senator Murkowski of Alaska just today introduced a bill (S771) into the >> US Senate to control spam. >> It does NOT ban spam (so no 1st Amendment problems), but does mandate truth Commercial speech is not and never has been protected by the First Amendment. >> in routing info (no spoofed addresses, etc) and also mandates that the >> first word in the Subject line be the word "advertisement" so promail >> filtering would be MUCH easier. It also mandates that the name, address and >> phone number of the actual sender be in the spam message itself. > Murkowski's bill does nothing about the theft of services that spam > represents to service providers. Spammers would still free to abuse > the bandwidth, CPU time, and disk space of ISP's. A procmail-type > filter can throw the message away once it arrives, but by then it's > too late. That's why the other bill is better! Check out www.cauce.org and contact your congressman!! Tell him to support Chris Smith's bill, the "Netizen's protection act of 1997." Sure, it has a dumb name, but it's a good bill. Read all about it at www.cauce.org hillary gorman......................................hillary@netaxs.com If you need help, contact ------------------------------ From: Chris Farrar Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 11:32:23 -0400 Organization: Sympatico Reply-To: cfarrar@sympatico.ca Patrick Tufts wrote: > Privacy. You cannot legally send a fax in the US without including a > contact number (I forget if it has to be the telephone number for the > sending machine) in the document. Actually you can get away without a contact number, if your machine is old enough that it doesn't put that header info onto what you fax. :-) Chris Farrar | cfarrar@sympatico.ca | Amateur Radio, a VE3CFX | fax +1-905-457-8236 | national resource PGPkey Fingerprint = 3B 64 28 7A 8C F8 4E 71 AE E8 85 31 35 B9 44 B2 ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 05:45:02 -0400 Organization: Mindspring Enterprises > Privacy. You cannot legally send a fax in the US without including a > contact number (I forget if it has to be the telephone number for the > sending machine) in the document. I've received no fewer than fifty faxes (I know the sending party) with a "000000000" sending number. I have casually (repeatedly) advised them to program their number into their machine, to no avail, and to date the 'fax police' haven't shown up on their doorstep. All these neat regulations aren't enforced, and I strongly suspect any move to enforce SPAM legislation will be limited to high-profile cases, while the 'mom-and-pop' operaters continue to sell their "two million addresses" and "e-mail with stealth" programs ... (BTW: Why hasn't Hormel joined in the suit against Mr. Wallace... :->) ------------------------------ From: brianm@ricochet.net (Diablo Cat) Subject: Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 16:53:47 GMT On Mon, 26 May 1997 15:07:24 -0500, jfmezei wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read carefully Brian. Unsolicited email >> of a **commercial nature**. Furthermore, when you post in a newsgroup >> you are soliciting responses. PAT] > (Receiving a spam about a religion is just as bad as about the > opportunity to make $10,000,000 overnight). I can see that even people in this group can't really decide what would constitue spam, and whether or not you are asking for responses when you post a news article. I have little confidence that any politician currently in office will be able to put together a logical definition of spam that doesn't infringe on some legitimate communications. I tend to believe that based on the First Amendment, spam should be legal. However, even the First Amendment doesn't allow harassment. I think what will end up happening, and perhaps I am being cynical, the legislation will go the way of the Communications Decency Act, and will have to go to trial to figure out whether it is legal or not. Since bytes are now purchased, because some people have to pay for the amount of email they get, or the connect time is charged, it will be interesting to see how far this will go. Brian. D. Moffet, speaking for myself. But you should know that :-) ------------------------------ From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: Anti-Spam Coalition Date: 27 May 1997 10:06:40 -0400 Organization: Society for the Elimination of Junk Unsolicited Bulk Email Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com Quoth Lawrence W. Kauffman in : > The Anti-Spam Coalition is a non-profit organization dedicated to the > legislative reform of laws pertaining to the use of unsolicited mails > as a means of marketing goods and services. Or maybe not ... This Usenet spam was sent indiscriminately to more than 1000 newsgroups. The web page lists as its address a maildrop service in Simi Valley. Nobody I know has ever heard of "Lawrence W. Kauffman". The only person my Web searches have turned up by that name is an obscure minor-party political candidate in Utah. This appears to be little more than a scheme to separate frustrated victims of Junk EMail from their money. Could someone in California check and see whether this organization is registered as a California NPO? Tom Betz, Generalist Want to send me email? First, read this page: ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 1997 00:42:07 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Warning: Scam Alert Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. This message was a 100% scam. The guy was trolling for credit card numbers and, for people dumb enough to send him checks, cash. In article you write: > The Anti-Spam Coalition is a non-profit organization dedicated to the > legislative reform of laws pertaining to the use of unsolicited mails > as a means of marketing goods and services. > http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/8509/antispam.html > Lawrence Kauffman > President/ASC John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All I can say is sorry ... it appears that one got past me. I wish I had more resources available to review things like this before publishing them in good faith. I guess the way the net is getting these days nothing should be accepted in good faith any longer. I sincerely assumed the guy was putting together a coalition or organization of people to fight spam. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #136 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 30 00:34:02 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA23316; Fri, 30 May 1997 00:34:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 00:34:02 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705300434.AAA23316@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #137 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 May 97 00:34:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 137 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Calling Cards (LEC, AT&T, Other LD Companies) (Mark J. Cuccia) Is a $50 Billion Merger What Deregulation Was Really All About? (Tad Cook) FTC Settles Global Dialing Scheme Case (Tad Cook) Lawsuit Targets Spammers and Mass E-Mailers (Eric Hunt) AT&T Bails Out of California Local Service (Tad Cook) Virtual CivicNet '97 (Lisa Kimball) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 29 May 1997 11:56:25 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Calling Cards (LEC, AT&T, Other LD Companies) Dave Stott wrote: > In today's (5/28/97) {Wall Street Journal}, page C5, there appears a > "Notice to AT&T Customers." > Here are the general changes -- my questions are in parentheses. > Basically AT&T is changing calling card calls for both customer and > operator dialed calls to $0.35 per minute, regardless of time or > distance. (I wonder if that includes intraLATA calls?) I think that these charges are if you are under an optional promotion plan, such as the new AT&T "one-rate" plans. As for inTRA-LATA calls, yes these rates would probably apply as well, as long as the calling-card call was placed by accessing the AT&T OSPS network, by either: (10(10)288)+0+ten-digits, or 800-CALL-ATT access, or 800-321-0ATT access, etc. > On calling card calls placed via 1-800-CALLATT and billed to an AT&T > card, the service charge drops from $0.90 to $0.35 per call. If you > use another method for accessing the AT&T network (1-800-321-0288?), > the charge drops from $0.90 to $0.60. If you bill to a LEC calling > card (can you still do that? Where?) the fee drops from $1.20 per > call to $0.60 per call. Finally, if you access their network other > than 1-800-CALLATT and bill to a LEC card, the fee is now $0.95. I don't think that there is any charging difference between the two 800 access numbers. The differences might be if you used (10(10)288)-0+ vs. use of an 800- number, or maybe the difference between a '0+' like access vs. the use of a '0-' like access. "Zero-minus" means that you came into a live AT&T operator 'cold'. You _verbally_ quote to her the number you wish to call, rather than having previously dialed/touchtoned it into the system. It can mean being connected to an AT&T operator 'directly', or by requesting the local telco (LEC) operator to connect you with the AT&T operator. As for the differences between a LEC-issued and an AT&T-issued card ... AT&T will still accept the LEC-issed (NYNEX, BellSouth, GTE, other local independent, Canadian local telco, etc) calling cards. But they seem to carry a higher surcharge. Also billing an AT&T-handled call to a local telco issued calling card will _NOT_ give you any discounts you might have in an AT&T promotion or plan. HOWEVER, AT&T has been cancelling their mutual card-honoring arrangements with the local telcos, over the past year and a half. For inTRA-LATA calls handled 'directly' by the local telco's inTRA-LATA network, you can NOT bill such calls to an _AT&T_ issued card in most cases. I think that NYNEX was the first area to have this happen. BellSouth's TOPS operators won't bill BellSouth-handled inTRA-LATA calls to an AT&T-issued card since December 1996. There might come a time when the LEC-issued card can't be used by AT&T, as the LECs want to become Long-Distance carriers, and AT&T wants to become a local telco. I don't have anything specific on what _could_ happen in the future, however. LEC-issued cards _can_ be used to place MCI and Sprint handled calls. Also, LEC-issued cards are 'accepted' and billed (at exorbitant surcharges) by many small carriers/resellers, _especially_ the AOSlime at private payphones and hotel/motel/hospital/etc. 'guest' PBX systems. A LEC-issued card can be based on your ten-digit telephone number plus a four-digit "PIN", _or_ it can be based on the LEC's RAO (Revenue Accounting Office) code. Such RAO-based cards are of the format: NXX-0/1XX-xxxx, plus a four-digit (nxxx) "PIN". RAO's for non-line-number-based card purposes range from 2XX through 7XX. The long-distance companies _must_ be given non-discriminatory access to the LEC's card-validation LIDB's, etc., although the LEC's can charge the LD companies and AOSlimers a fee for such access. MCI will accept a local-telco-issued card via 800-COLLECT (800-265-5328), although they will add _their_ surcharges for such calls. Likewise, Sprint will accept LEC-issued cards via 800-210-CARD (800-210-2273), and at _their_ surcharges. But the LD carriers don't have to allow local telcos access to _their_ card or account/authorization-code databases. Therefore, many MCI and Sprint (and now AT&T) 'proprietary' cards are _not_ accepted by the LEC's for inTRA-LATA calls placed via the LEC's inTRA-LATA card/operator systems. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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- ------------------------------ Subject: Is a $50 Billion Merger What Deregulation Was Really All About? Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 23:01:29 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Portions of an article from Wednesday's {Wall Street Journal}: Calling Ma Bell: Is a $50 billion merger what deregulation was really all about? By JOHN J. KELLERand BRYAN GRULEY The Wall Street Journal How big is too big? The disclosure that AT&T Corp. is discussing a possible $50 billion-plus merger with two of the seven regional Bell companies that it spun off more than a decade ago is sparking hot debate over whether such a megagiant would simply be too big for the country's -- and consumers' -- good. AT&T is in serious discussions with SBC Communications Corp., the Texas Bell that itself completed a $16.5 billion acquisition of another Bell sibling, Pacific Telesis Group, only two months ago. The effort could ultimately collapse as negotiators tussle over terms and power structure. Even if an accord is reached, federal regulators will give hard scrutiny to a deal so big -- twice the size of the largest merger in corporate history -- that it would create the largest U.S. collection of telecom assets since the old American Telephone & Telegraph Co. was broken up in 1984. Critics will complain that AT&T is trying to rebuild the Bell System monopoly that the federal government tore apart in 1984 and to return to an era of few rivals and less choice for customers. AT&T and SBC will say, if they can pull off a merger pact, that they are girding for the global telecom wars and that, once combined, they will be stronger and better able to provide consumers with more competition rather than less. Either way, the fact that AT&T and SBC would dare discuss such an audacious plan underscores a ringing truth: This era of gazillion-dollar mergers aimed at erecting ever larger -- but ever fewer -- world-scale competitors isn't what lawmakers and regulators had in mind. "The forces of evil unleashed by the new telecom act are now obviously running far ahead of the forces of good. This cannot happen. This can't go forward," complains Mark Cooper, research director of the Consumer Federation of America. Last year, Congress tore down decades-old barriers to competition so that all kinds of telecom rivals could have at it. The aim was to let consumers choose among dozens of competitors selling local, long-distance and wireless telephone service and sundry other services ranging from video to Internet access. Instead, giant telecom carriers seem far more interested in combining than in invading one another's turf. Consumers have new choices in only a few markets since the Communications Act of 1996 was enacted, but multibillion-dollar deal-making has been all over the map. In addition to the SBC-PacTel deal, Bell Atlantic Corp. is close to completing its acquisition of Nynex Corp. MCI Communications Corp. is about to be acquired by British Telecom PLC, and Sprint Corp. already is 20 percent-owned by the German and French carriers. Other big shoes may yet drop, involving other Bells or perhaps GTE Corp. With AT&T moving closer to a Bell deal, the pending BT-MCI combination could end up launching its own purchase of a Bell company. An AT&T-SBC merger is different mainly in that it would be so much bigger, combining the largest long-distance company with the largest local-service company (Bell Atlantic-Nynex will eclipse SBC once that deal closes). Investors seemed to welcome a deal between the companies. In heavy New York Stock Exchange composite trading Tuesday, AT&T ended at $37.50 a share, up $1.37 1/2, while SBC was at $57.62 1/2, up 75 cents. A merged AT&T-SBC would have annual revenue of almost $80 billion, net income approaching $9 billion, 240,000 workers, and the most powerful local and long-distance connections in the industry. It would be larger than most foreign national carriers. But are such enormous combinations good for consumers? And will the politicians and regulators who hailed deregulation because of their faith in the "free market" stand aside now that the market has found unprecedented size desirable? Don't count on the politicians to stay out of this fight. Rep. John Dingell, the Michigan Democrat who was one of the principal drafters of the telecom law, says: "This reminds me of Humpty Dumpty: All the king's horses and all the king's men are engaged in putting Ma Bell together again. If there was a reason for splitting the company before, those reasons probably still remain valid." The AT&T-SBC effort "creates huge competitive problems. This isn't what was supposed to happen," says Anne Bingaman, the former Justice Department antitrust chief who lobbied hard for the telecom law. A high official of the Federal Communications Commission adds: "It's getting out of hand, this merger mania." White House officials were caught by surprise and shocked, individuals in government and industry say, to realize that their support of the telecom law would lead to such a megadeal. ------------------------------ Subject: FTC Settles Global Dialing Scheme Case Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 23:14:34 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) FTC settles case involving global dialing scheme WASHINGTON (Reuter) - An Iowa man accused of luring unwitting consumers to make lengthy calls to Guyana and the Caribbean for free travel offers agreed to pay $111,000 to settle fraud charges, regulators said Wednesday. The Federal Trade Commission said it is the first action by the United States against a pay-per-call service that zaps consumers with sky-high phone bills for overseas calls. The FTC alleged in December that Daniel Lubell solicited consumers to call what turned out to be international numbers to enter a free Hawaiian vacation sweepstakes, and to get information about free or discount travel. Lubell, who lives in Bettendorf, Iowa, did business as Mercantile Messaging and DB&L Inc. As a part of the settlement, he did not admit or deny guilt. The FTC said Lubbell did not tell consumers they would incur a hefty charge on their phone bill -- up to $2.33 a minute, or more than $30 -- to hear an entire taped message. He also failed to inform consumers they could enter the sweepstakes only by mail, or that they first had to buy an airline ticket to benefit from the information being peddled, according to the FTC. The 15-minute recorded message explained how to get bumped from oversold flights to get free airline tickets, the FTC said. The message also gave consumers an address to write to get an entry form for the sweepstakes, the agency added. In addition to the fine, the FTC settlement bars similar violations in the future. The FTC is considering extending consumer safeguards for 900-number calls to other pay-per-call services that involve overseas calls and use a prefix other than "900." The agency's existing 900-number rules require clear cost disclosures and a means for settling billing disputes. The newer services offer callers astrological and travel information, psychic advice and phone sex, among other topics. "International audiotext schemes have grown dramatically in the recent past as scam artists try to evade the 900 number rule's cost-disclosure and free preamble message requirements," said Jodie Bernstein, director of the FTC's bureau of consumer protection. ------------------------------ From: ehunt@bga.com (Eric Hunt) Subject: Lawsuit Targets Spammers and Mass E-Mailers Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 09:29:43 -0500 Organization: Lil' Ole' Me Lawsuit targets spammers and mass e-mailers By Kirk Ladendorf American-Statesman Staff A group of Austin Internet businesses has filed suit against a San Diego company in hopes of establishing a precedent against using improper technical tricks to promote spamming -- the practice of flooding Internet users with junk e-mail. The main plaintiff in the suit is Tracy LaQuey Parker of Austin, who sells flower and gardening information over the Internet. She says the San Diego company illegally used her e-mail address as the return address for a mass e-mail. Parker said her e-mailbox and that of her Internet service provider were inundated with returned copies of the San Diego firm's message. Calls to the San Diego company, C.N. Enterprises, were not answered Wednesday. Internet experts say such electronic junk mailing is an increasing nuisance. Spammers often use false return Internet addresses on their mass e-mailings. Doing so allows them to avoid angry electronic responses from Internet users and thousands of return messages that result from sending e-mail to invalid or outdated addresses. Joining Parker in filing the suit in Travis County District Court are Zilker Internet Park, Parker's Internet service provider, the Texas Internet Service Providers Association and the Austin chapter of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The groups said they were joining the lawsuit to seek a broad legal precedent against spamming and the use of forged e-mail addresses. "These forgeries (falses return addresses) dump huge volumes of unwanted junk mail onto Internet companies and their customers," said Gene Crick, president of the Texas Internet Service Providers Association. "TISPA would like to see the court grant a broad and clear injunction prohibiting this practice." The lawsuit is based on common laws guarding against nuisance and trespass, according to Parker's attorneys. It seeks unspecified damages. Parker claims that C.N. Enterprises and Craig Nowak of San Diego improperly used her business's Internet address as the false return address on a mass e-mailing it did on March 31 and April 1 for a business promotion. The e-mailing was an electronic advertisement promoting information about free cash grants for college students for $19.95. Those who wanted the information were told to mail or fax their replies. Parker said her business, Flowers.com, which sells flower and garden information over the Internet, had to deal with more than 6,000 electronic responses to the mass e-mailing from C.N. Enterprises. Parker said the flood of responses resulted in a major inconvenience to her business and Zilker Internet Park. "There are plenty of examples of legitimate commercial uses of the Internet," Parker said. "This isn't one of them." John Quarterman, an owner of Zilker Internet, said that spamming is a growing problem that costs Internet service providers much time and money. "We have put many technical blocks in place to limit it,'' Quarterman said. "With this lawsuit, we are taking the next step to help stop this abuse.'' The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Parker and the others by lawyers Pete Kennedy and Roger Williams of George, Donaldson & Ford of Austin. Copyright 1997, Cox Interactive Media, Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------- Eric Hunt __ ehunt@bga.com (preferred) Austin, TX \/ hunt@metrowerks.com =20 http://www.realtime.net/~ehunt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think this is a *marvelous* action being taken. Apparently a lot of people are going to claim that spammers have free speech rights, and that existing laws do not apply to them, etc. There is however no right to appropriate someone else's email address for spam you want to send out. I have recently received spam which gave my name as the sender (!) so I think I will look into this a bit more also; suing the spammer for giving my email address as the sender. Anyone else have this problem? I certainly do wish an attorney would come forward to start giving Scamford some grief. Speaking of Scamford, someone mentioned to me today that Cyber Promotions was one of a couple spam outfits which have agreed with AGIS to suspend further spamming until some 'standards' have been agreed upon. Further news on this would be appreciated. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: AT&T Bails Out of Cali ocaService Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 22:49:56 -0700 (PDT) From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) AT&T Bails Out of Local Telephone Service in California BY HOWARD BRYANT, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, CALIF. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News May 29--AT&T Corp., which trumpeted a new era in telephone competition last year by offering local telephone service in Sacramento to compete with Pacific Bell, has dramatically scaled back service in that region, and put all plans for local telephone service in California on hold. AT&T executives blamed its main competition -- Pac Bell -- for its decision. For business purposes, Pac Bell owns the vast majority of the state's local telephone network. Since AT&T is a long-distance company, it must lease, or "resell" space on Pac Bell's telephone network. Therefore, any customers AT&T receives must have their billing and telephone information converted from Pac Bell to AT&T. AT&T is charging, both verbally and in complaints filed jointly with MCI Communications Corp. to the California Public Utilities Commission, that Pac Bell has dragged its feet in switching customers to AT&T's databases, a move that technically keeps the customer with Pacific Bell or sometimes without service. AT&T spokeswoman Alice Nagle said customers who currently receive their local service from AT&T will continue to do so, but the company's retreat is clear. AT&T has stopped all pro-active marketing, specifically outward telemarketing, to gain new customers. AT&T has offered no timetable for when it will resume, but Nagle said AT&T would begin soliciting customers only when Pac Bell has proven it can handle the demand. "Our hands are tied," Nagle said. "We are completely at their mercy." But Lee Bauman, Pacific Bell vice president for local competition, said AT&T was using the backlog issue as a smoke screen. Bauman said what AT&T is really trying to do is to slow down Pac Bell's entry into the $100 billion long-distance market. Under the 1996 Telecommunications Act, Pac Bell cannot offer long-distance service until it first proves that competition exists in the local market. AT&T's pullback would severely hurt competition and leave Pac Bell out of the long-distance market. "Fundamentally, AT&T is doing everything they can to keep us out of long distance," Bauman said. "That's the real reason. If it was purely something having to do with our ability to process orders, they would adjust their program, not discontinue it." Regina Costa, telecommunications analyst for San Francisco-based TURN, a consumer-advocacy group, said she was not surprised by AT&T's move. "It doesn't surprise me at all that Pac Bell has a backlog of orders," she said. "We've been hearing this all over the state, even from companies that are at each other's throats. There has to be a system in place to switch customers. Right now, a good one doesn't exist." Costa said the AT&T-Pac Bell rift is similar to the early days of competition in the long-distance market, when MCI endured the difficult position of looking bad to its customers because a reliable system to switch customers from AT&T was not yet in place. She also agreed with Pac Bell's assessment of AT&T's strategy, adding that AT&T was probably telegraphing its displeasure with these early days of local phone competition. "The truth is, they probably don't have many customers," she said. "When Pac Bell is making it difficult for people even to get the service, why should AT&T look bad in trying to sell it? By cutting back, I think they are trying to send a message." AT&T declined to say how many local phone customers it has in California. AT&T's backing out of the competition with Pac Bell comes at a curious time. AT&T is rumored to be negotiating a $50 billion merger with SBC Communications Inc., Pac Bell's new parent company. By owning SBC, AT&T would then not have to compete with it. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 10:27:31 -0400 From: Lisa Kimball Reply-To: lisa@tmn.com Organization: Metasystems Design Group Subject: Virtual CivicNet '97 "Hundreds from Around the World Discuss Internet and Community for Five Weeks at Virtual CivicNet Online Conference" Virtual CivicNet kicked off last week as over 200 participants shared success stories and struggles to build community networks -- grass-roots online services that provide local content, training and support. In a keynote address delivered over Memorial Day weekend Catherine Weldon, Director of Content of Community Networks Inc. said, " Community networking occurs when people and organizations collaborate locally to create opportunities and solve problems." Virtual CivicNet participants hail from countries worldwide including U.S., Canada, UK, Republic of Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Northern Ireland, Finland, Korea, Australia, Sweden, Mexico, Greece, Germany, The Netherlands and India. They haven't had to leave home to attend the conference because it is taking place entirely on the web (http://www.civicnet.org/civicnet). Andrew Cohill, of Blacksburg Electronic Village in Virginia said, "We were not able to afford to attend [a face to face conference], so we are very happy that we can attend online." Each can log on from their home or office computer from anywhere in the world, whenever it's convenient during the conference which takes place May 22 - June 30. Participants respond enthusiastically to the online format, "This conference format is great and has advantages over physical conferences. You have less chance of missing things and everyone can participate equally", said Lance Singbeil, Pharos Internet Publishing, Vancouver, British Columbia. The salon style online conference finds entrepreneurs, community network organizers, journalists, public officials, artists, teachers, researchers, funders, librarians, and investors working together to face shared issues --all with a wide diversity of community work experience as well as experience on the Web. John Glass, of Sociological Practice Training Institute, said, "I think that this is a monumental event that pioneers how we can truly create a global sense of community." Some of the key issues currently being discussed on Virtual CivicNet include: How do we market and draw interest to community nets? How can small manufacturing companies access external markets? What are the commercial players *not* doing that would be valuable services to the community? Who has experience with cyberspace incubators where smaller local businesses get help moving onto the Web? Can for profit and not-for profit community serving networks co-exist? What are the drivers of the future of communities? What is the critical mass required for a successful exchange of ideas regarding community planning or specific community issues? "It is important that values expressed in community networking influence emerging commercial services interested in developing local content markets" said Richard Civille, Executive Director the Center for Civic Networking, a conference co-organizer who developed the agenda. "We want this content to be beneficial to community life and civic affairs." Registration in Virtual CivicNet is $50 For more information http://www.civicnet.org/civicnet Contact: Richard Civille, Center for Civic Networking 202-244-5399, rciville@civicnet.org ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #137 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 30 01:08:22 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA25650; Fri, 30 May 1997 01:08:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 01:08:22 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705300508.BAA25650@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #138 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 May 97 01:08:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 138 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New 911 System Press Release (Jim Jacobs) Emergency Call Services (Raymond K.S. Yeung) Number Portability Introduced in Finland (Kimmo Ketolainen) Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (oldbear@arctos.com) USWest Changes to Coin Service (Babu Mengelepouti) Remote Access Problems (Jeanne Cooney) European Simulation Symposium, Germany, October 1997 (Alexander Verbraeck) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 29 May 1997 21:13:40 -0400 From: Jim Jacobs Subject: New 911 System Press Release Thursday May 29 12:06 PM EDT Company Press Release Berks County, Pa. to become first region in nation to offer improved 9-1-1 service from LifeSafety Solutions WYNNEWOOD, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 29, 1997--Berks County, Pa. is about to become the first area in the country to adopt a new generation of 9-1-1 call center technology designed to improve emergency response procedures and help save lives. The Berks County Board of Commissioners voted today to install the new system -- called 911Plus(TM) -- in its emergency services command center based in Reading. The centralized facility, providing police, fire and emergency medical assistance, serves a county population of 336,523 persons residing in 76 municipalities including Reading. 911Plus is a new breakthrough technology introduced in January 1997 by LifeSafety(TM) Solutions, Inc. of Wynnewood. The nationwide service provides police, fire and emergency medical services with critical personal information about subscribers such as medical history and preexisting conditions as well as the location of children, the elderly or the infirm within a household. In addition, a designated third party (such as a relative, care giver or neighbor) who has been identified as an emergency contact by the subscriber, is notified by the LifeSafety Solutions Communications Center that a 9-1-1 call was initiated. The new service goes a step further than the Enhanced 9-1-1 currently in use by Berks County and many municipalities across the nation, which only provides emergency call centers with the phone number and address of a 9-1-1 caller. With 911Plus, when a subscriber calls 9-1-1 for help, a simultaneous transmission of their personal information is routed from the 911Plus database and delivered via computer screen to the 9-1-1 call taker at the time the emergency call is answered. ``We feel that 911Plus has great potential to provide valuable information and assistance to police, fire and emergency medical personnel who are responding to a 9-1-1 call and may even potentially be the difference between life and death in some instances,'' said Craig S. Breneiser, Director of Communications for Berks County. ``We're especially pleased to enhance our reputation of remaining on the cutting edge of technology and new developments in public-safety communications by being the first large, multi-jurisdictional communications facility to bring 911Plus to the public.'' LifeSafety Solutions will provide the necessary 911Plus hardware and software at no cost to the Berks County public safety 9-1-1 center. The optional subscription service will cost households eight dollars per month (billed on their local telephone bill) or a discounted $84 per year for those consumers preferring to prepay for a year's service. The system is expected to be placed into public service on August 1. ``The launch of 911Plus in Berks County marks a new generation of personal safety services for consumers,'' said Jay T. Snider, president and chief executive officer of LifeSafety Solutions. ``We've forged a partnership between government and private industry that advances and improves emergency service response capabilities. Berks County has distinguished itself as a forward thinking county committed to providing the utmost in public-safety protection. We're excited to work with Berks County as it becomes the first public-safety agency in the world to take full advantage of this potentially lifesaving breakthrough.'' A print and television advertising campaign will launch this summer in support of the new service. Consumers seeking more information about 911Plus can call LifeSafety Solutions at 888-4-911PLUS. LifeSafety Solutions, Inc., established in 1996, was founded by the partners of SpectaGuard, Inc., the Wynnewood, Pa.-based Integrated Asset Protection company with 3,500 employees providing security services at shopping malls, high-rise office buildings, colleges, banks, business complexes, transportation centers, hospitals and industrial sites throughout the Northeast region of the country. LifeSafety and 911Plus are trademarks of LifeSafety Solutions, Inc. ------------------------------ From: Raymond K.S. Yeung Subject: Emergency Call Services Date: 28 May 1997 20:31:41 GMT Organization: AdiCom Wireless Does anyone know what a PBX would do when there's no resources (e.g. outgoing trunks) to support an emergency call (i.e. 911) from a local PBX subscriber? Would the PBX block the emergency call? Or would it bump out another "non-emergency" call to get the needed resources? Any publicized standards that specify this scenario? Raymond ryeung@adicomw.com ------------------------------ From: kk@iki.fi (Kimmo Ketolainen) Subject: Number Portability Introduced in Finland Date: 28 May 1997 06:32:41 +0300 Organization: Weyland-Yutani Corporation The Telecommunications Administration Centre (TAC) has just last week started to register national portable numbers under the 071 code using seven digits, i.e. maximum 10 million different numbers (population of the country: 5.1 million). There are today 38 (thirty-eight) individual registered numbers, including 071 111 1111 and 071 234 5678. Timeline of number portability in Finland is as follows: 19 Jun 1996 Decision to introduce number portability (TAC) Press release: 1 Nov 1996 Testing of number portability begins at all ~50 telecoms 19 Mar 1997 Release of technical details and registration rules (TAC) 15 May 1997 Release of further rules (TAC) 1 Jun 1997 Number portability introduced by telecoms 30 Sep 1998 Number portability available at all locations Registration has been started using the subsets 1 and 2 of the 071 code (071 1.. and 071 2..). See for registration tables (headings in English). One time registration fees are: 1-9 numbers: 100 FIM/decision 10-1000 numbers: 300 FIM/decision over 1000 numbers: 1000 FIM/decision Registrations are independent of any telecoms but registered numbers must be taken in use (on any subscriber landline) in six months. After that period unused numbers will be returned back to the public spool. Great Britain will adopt number portability in the autumn of 1997. Kimmo Ketolainen * kk@sci.fi * http://iki.fi/kk * Tel. Earth +358 40 55555 08 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 21:22:49 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? WHERE DO YOU PUT 100,000 CELL PHONE TOWERS? While the U.S. government eagerly sells off portions of the electromagnetic spectrum in the interest of balancing the federal budget, legislators are overlooking a major hurdle for the companies that want to use these frequencies. Unlike analog cellular service, which is supported by fewer than 15,000 towers nationwide, the next-generation digital cellular -- known as PCS -- will require more than 100,000 cellular towers to provide reliable service. More than 300 communities already have revolted, imposing moratoria on cell tower construction, and the movement is growing. Fueling the problem are fears that property values will be adversely affected by the giant structures and suspicions that cellular transmissions can cause increased instances of leukemia and other health problems. "Today, there are 45 million users of wireless phones, yet we are still unable to certify the safety of this product for American consumers because adequate research apparently has not been performed," writes Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), who's asked the FDA to assess the research done to date. source: Investor's Business Daily May 29, 1997 as summarized by edupage ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 18:24:24 -0700 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: USWest changes to coin service There are some fairly interesting things happening in the Pacific Northwest areas that USWest serves: - USWest is updating many of its payphones from Western Electric style to new Northern Telecom Millenium payphones. These are very expensive (I've heard varying reports on their price ranging from $1,000-$2,000 apiece) which have a digital display, card reader, etc. They are also immune to "red box" toll fraud, as they behave like COCOTs (determination of funds put into the phone is determined by the phone itself, not the central office -- then the phone dials the call from an unrestricted line). - They are eliminating the "bell" logo from anything that references USWest Communications. They have even gone so far as to change out the cards on the top of their payphones to new ones that do not bear the "bell" logo. - Filings have been made with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission and the Oregon PUC to raise coin rates for local calls. Initially they want 35 cents but some sources say that they want to eventually raise rates to 50 cents or more. Already in Nebraska local calls from USWest payphones cost 35 cents. Of course this is to "make coin calls pay for themselves" even though COCOT owners seem to do just fine with LOWER coin-paid toll rates and the same price for local calls. - USWest operators will no longer connect you to repair service for coin telephones. They ask if there is a number on the phone, and will put you through to that if you ask. Or if there is no number, they'll connect you for free to directory assistance to get the number. This is because it is apparently illegal now for USWest operators to offer any service to themselves that they do not also offer to COCOT owners, and even though they know their own telephone numbers they can't keep track of every COCOT. Therefore one has to squint in the dark and read off of a weather-stained card on a payphone to find the 800 number to USWest, or talk to an out-of-state directory assistance operator who can't find a number to USWest because it's not an 800 number. Or gives you the number to the business office which is usually closed. . /|\ //|\\ Welcome to the rainforest... ///|\\\ dialtone@vcn.bc.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 23:00:46 -0400 From: Jeanne Cooney Subject: Remote Access Problems Organization: Information Access Center Hello ... Re: Remote access solution using Cisco Access Server AS5200s and PRI lines. We have run into an intermittent problem that we can not figure out (or sometimes duplicate). On two separate occasions we have run into fast busy signals in seven of ten calls. - The first time the carrier indicated that it was a D channel failure (I was of the impression that if a D channel failed that the channels would go in lock out and the next PRI would be selected). We will be testing this tomorrow. - The second time we tested and determined that the first channel was creating a problem (carrier disabled all channels in the PRI except the one being tested and pulsed in on the channel ... we were able to repeatedly duplicate the problem on channel one). Working with IAC we moved the PRI to the second AS5200 and tested the first channel again - NO BUSY. We then moved the PRI back to the first AS5200 to see if the channel was still in trouble (this would prove that it was hardware) ... NO BUSY. The trouble vanished and now we have no explanation. Any ideas? Help! Please send comments to jcooney@zd.com. Thanks. ....jeanne ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 11:40:03 GMT From: a.verbraeck@sepa.tudelft.nl (Dr. Alexander Verbraeck) Subject: CFP: European Simulation Symposium, Passau, Germany, October 1997 Organization: Delft University of Technology SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS -- REVISED DEADLINES ESS'97 - 9TH EUROPEAN SIMULATION SYMPOSIUM AND EXHIBITION SIMULATION IN INDUSTRY Passau, Germany, October 19-23, 1997 Organized and sponsored by: The Society for Computer Simulation International Hosted by: University of Passau. Faculty of Mathematics & Computer Science For more information, see one of the Web pages: http://hobbes.rug.ac.be/~scs/conf/ess97/ http://www.sepa.tudelft.nl/~alexandv/scs/conf/ess97/ ======================================================================= SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM ======================================================================= The SCS European Simulation Symposium is in its 9th year, and usually has around 200 participants from all over the world and around 180 paper presentations. The proceedings of the conference is published both as a book and on CD-ROM. The 1997 European Simulation Symposium is divided into the following main parts: * scientific program * a professional exhibition and * an industrial program. The scientific program will bring together three main subconferences, each with several topics: * Simulation Methodology, * Simulation in Industry, * Simulation in Engineering. Papers are invited for presentation at the conference and for publication in the conference proceedings on the subjects as stated below. For more detailed information concerning major topics of each of the three conferences, or if you want to contact any of the program chairs of the subconferences, please see below. General Chair: Winfried Hahn University of Passau, D-94030 Passau, Germany Tel: ++49 851 509 3050, Fax: ++49 851 509 3042 email: hahn@fmi.uni-passau.de General Program Chair: Axel Lehmann University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich, Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39, D-85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: ++49 89 6004 2648, Fax: ++49 89 6004 3560 email: Lehmann@informatik.unibw-muenchen.de URL: http://www.informatik.unibw-muenchen.de/inst4/lehmann/ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMME + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++ INVITED KEYNOTE SPEECH ++++++++++++++++++++++ DESIGN CONCEPTS for WEB-ENABLED SIMULATION ENVIRONMENTS presented by: Guiseppe Iazeolla, Andrea D'Ambrogio, University of Rome, Italy ++++++++++++++++++++++ SIMULATION METHODOLOGY ++++++++++++++++++++++ Program Chair: Wolfgang Borutzky Cologne Politechnic, Am Sandberg 1, D-51643 Gummersbach, Germany Tel.: ++49 2261 81 96 411, Fax: ++49 2261 8195 15 email: wolfgang.borutzky@uni-koeln.de with Subgroups: - Object-Oriented Simulation - Simulation Environments and Tools - Automated Modeling, Graphical Modeling, Equations Generation, Reusable Models - Advanced Modeling and Simulation Environments and Tools - Hierarchical Multiphysical Domain System Modeling - Combined Continuous - Discrete Event System Modeling - Distributed & Parallel System Simulation - Analytical & Numerical Methods, DAE-Systems - Validation & Verification Methods - Qualitative Modeling - Animation, Virtual Reality, VRML ++++++++++++++++++++++ SIMULATION IN INDUSTRY ++++++++++++++++++++++ Program Chair: Hans Ziegler University of Passau, D-94030 Passau, Germany Tel: ++49 851 509 2450, Fax: ++49 851 509 2452 email: ziegler@uni-passau.de with Subgroups: - Simulation in Manufacturing - Simulation in CIM & CAD - Simulation in Logistics - Simulation in Business - Simulation in Economy +++++++++++++++++++++++++ SIMULATION IN ENGINEERING +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Program Chair: F.-J. Rammig Uni-GH Paderborn, Fuerstenallee 11, D-33102 Paderborn, Germany Tel: ++49 5251 60 6500, Fax: ++49 5251-60-6502 email: franz@uni-paderborn.de with Subgroups: - Simulation in Biomedicine - Simulation in Computer Design - Simulation in Telecommunication - Simulation in Electrical Engineering - Simulation in Energy System - Simulation in Power Plants +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + INDUSTRIAL EXHIBITION + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ An exhibition will be held in the central area connecting the lecture halls where all participants meet for coffee and tea. There will be a special exhibition section for universities and non-profit organisations, and a special section for publishers and commercial stands. If you would like to take part in this exhibition please contact the Exhibition Chair for a full price schedule and stand layout. Chair: Ellen Walther-Klaus Siemens Nixdorf Informationssyst AG., Postfach 401220 D-80712 Muenchen, Germany Tel:++49 89 3601 1125 Fax: ++49 89 3601 1105 email: ewalther@horus.mch.sni.de +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + INDUSTRIAL PROGRAM + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Program Chair: Agostino G. Bruzzone ITIM, University of Genoa, via C.Colombo 68/3 I-17019 Varazze (SV), Italy Tel: ++39 19 97398, Fax: ++39 19 97600 email: bruzzone@linux.it For demonstrations or video sessions, please contact SCS Inter- national at the European Office. Special sessions well be set up for vendor presentations in coordination with the scientific program +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + TUTORIALS / PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SEMINARS + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The first day of the Symposium, several Tutorials or Professional Development Seminars will be offered for all participants of the Symposium on "hot" topics like: - Java and its potential for simulation - Simulation on the internet - Problem-solving with knowledge-based simulation Other topics and tutorial proposals should be submitted to the General Program Chair before June 30 th. ======================================================================== DEADLINES AND REQUIREMENTS ======================================================================== FULL PAPERS (5-8 pages) or EXTENDED ABSTRACTS (3 pages or more) or SHORT PAPERS (2-3 pages) should be submitted in quadruplicate and sent in printed form or via E-mail (in ASCII, rtf, Tex or LaTex, uuencoded, zipped, binhexed (the latter 3 only for Word and WP for Windows 95) to Philippe Geril, SCS European Office, University of Ghent Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium Tel (Office): ++32 9 2337790, Fax: ++32 9 2234941 Tel.+Fax(Private): ++32 59 800 804 email: philippe.geril@rug.ac.be During review, the submitted FULL PAPERS or EXTENDED ABSTRACTS can be accepted by the programme committee, as either an extended (8 pages) paper if excellent, or as a regular (6 pages) paper. Each submission will be reviewed by at least three members of the International Program Committee. It is also possible to submit a SHORT PAPER to the conference. Short papers should also be structured as a scientific paper and will be refereed by the Program Committee, but the rules are applied less strict. Short papers are an ideal outlet for current research or industrial applications. Short papers usually do not appear in the main volume of the conference proceedings. Presentation time is a little shorter than that of full papers. In short: - Submit a FULL PAPER -> can be accepted as regular or extended paper - Submit an EXTENDED ABSTRACT -> usually accepted as regular paper - Submit a SHORT PAPER -> can only be accepted as short paper All submissions, written in English, must clearly indicate the name, affiliation, address, phone number and email address of the primary authors. They must clearly state what is new and point out significant results. In case of multi-authors, one author should be identified as the corresponding author for the paper. Only original papers which have not previously been published elsewhere will be accepted. Full papers or extended abstracts due: June 15, 1997 Short papers due: July 1, 1997 Acceptance Notification: July 25, 1997 Full camera ready copies due: September 5, 1997 OTHER REMARKS ============= Authors are expected to register early (at a reduced fee) and to attend the conference at their own expense to present their accepted papers. Without early registration and payment, the paper will not be published in the Conference Proceedings. Each registration covers only 1 paper. Along with the letter of acceptance, an author kit with complete instructions for preparing a camera-ready copy for the Proceedings will be sent to authors of accepted papers. The camera-ready copy is due in printed form or via E-mail (in rtf, Tex or LaTex, uuencoded, zipped, binhexed (the latter 3 only for Word and WP for Win95). The final manuscript for extended papers are expected to be 8 pages long whereas the regular papers are approximately 6 pages long. Short papers are at most 5 pages but do not appear in the official proceedings. In order to guarantee a high-quality conference, the extended and regular papers will be reviewed to check whether the suggestions of the program committee have been incorporated. Language The official conference and the language of accepted papers will be English. State of The Art Reviews or Panel Discussions If you plan to a give state-of-the-art review or to organize a panel discussion, then please contact the European Simulation Office. Best Paper Award The 1997 European Simulation Symposium will award the best papers, one in each track. From these papers the best overall paper will be chosen. The overall best paper will be awarded a free registration for an SCS conference. LOCAL ORGANIZATION ================== Silvia Hurt University of Passau, D-94030 Passau, Germany Tel: ++49 851 509 3053, Fax: ++49 851 509 3042 email: hurt@fmi.uni-passau.de ======================================================================== REGISTRATION ======================================================================== Registration Fees Author SCS / Eurosim Members Other Particip. ======================================================================== Pre-registration 16000 BEF 16000 BEF 18000 BEF before Sept 5th, 97 (800 DM) (800 DM) (900 DM) ======================================================================== Registration after Pre-registration 18000 BEF 20000 BEF Sept 5th, 1997 required (900 DM) (1000 DM) ======================================================================== MEETINGS ======== User Group meetings for simulation languages and tools can be organised on Monday. If you would like to arrange a meeting, please contact the Conference Chairmen. We will be happy to provide a meeting room and other necessary equipment. VENUE ===== Passau is sometimes referred to as the Venice of Germany, because of its location on the confluence of three rivers, the Ilz, the Inn, and the Danube. Attributed to a statement by Alexander von Humboldt, Passau is one of the seven most beautiful towns in the world. CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS ====================== Philippe Geril, SCS European Office, University of Ghent Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium Tel (Office): ++32 9 2337790, Fax: ++32 9 2234941 Tel.+Fax(Private): ++32 59 800 804 email: philippe.geril@rug.ac.be ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #138 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 30 02:04:18 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA28904; Fri, 30 May 1997 02:04:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 02:04:18 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705300604.CAA28904@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #139 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 May 97 02:04:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 139 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Clinton: President backs "Internet V-chip" (Monty Solomon) Bandwidth is a Replacement For Switching. Shannon? (Dave Penkler) Telecom Distance Education-Help? (R. Marklund) Re: Need Help Dealing With Ameritech (David Richards) Re: Warning: Scam Alert (Hillary Gorman) Re: AT&T/SBC Merger (Lars Poulsen) Systems Rated: Your Opinions, Please? (Bob Khan) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 30 May 1997 00:40:39 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Clinton: President Backs "Internet V-chip" Begin forwarded message: Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 11:58:35 -0800 From: --Todd Lappin-- Subject: CLINTON: President backs "Internet V-chip" THE CDA DISASTER NETWORK May 29, 1997 After a long (and glaring) silence on the issue, President Clinton *may* be backing away from his earlier support of the Internet censorship provisions contained within the Communications Decency Act. Or so it seems. Between the President's recent, off-the-cuff policy statement of support for a "V-chip for the Internet" and the muddled attempts at follow-up clarification offered by his staff, it's clear that the White House is still trying to get a handle on how the Internet works, and what can be done to shield children from inappropriate material in cyberspace. Are these statements an encouraging sign? Perhaps ... but based on the transcripts that follow below, it's not clear that the White House has much interest in defending free speech on the Internet. The devil is always in the details, and it's obvious the Clinton administration still has a long way to go before they get all the details nailed down. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is expected to hand down its decision on the CDA sometime within the next five weeks. How will the White House respond if the CDA is overturned? We'll just have to wait and see. Work the network! --Todd Lappin--> Section Editor WIRED Magazine ------------------------------ From Wired News: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/story/4148.html Give Him a V! by Wired News Staff 9:05am 29.May.97.PDT Last Friday, in a town hall meeting on education in Clarksburg, West Virginia, President Clinton made some news on the technology front. Answering a question from a parent about how to keep children safe on the Net, the president talked about the Communications Decency Act's travails in federal court. Then he said "we're working on" a technological fix, a V-chip for PCs that could protect children from harm. Later, reporters pressed White House aides on whether there was a new V-chip initiative. The new chip is out there, they said, somewhere "within the industry." FROM WHITE HOUSE TRANSCRIPTS OF THE EVENT AND LATER BRIEFINGS: Jim Eschenmann: Mr. President, my name is Jim Eschenmann. I'm a proud parent of a 4-year-old preschooler. Your administration, as well as the local board of education, has placed a large emphasis on connecting every classroom to the Internet. What additional measures can we take to protect our school students from the harmful areas of the Internet while guaranteeing full access to post-secondary students and to protect the freedom of speech? President Clinton: Well, you know, I signed a bill - when I signed the telecommunications bill I had a provision in there to try to protect against young people being exposed to some of the harmful things that are on the Internet. Not just pornography but, as I'm sure a lot of you know because of the events in the news in the last couple of years, there are even instructions on how to build bombs and things like that. There are lot of things on there that we wouldn't want our children to see. That provision has been thrown out by a court and is still in the courts, I think. So it may be that what we have to do is try to develop something like the equivalent of what we're developing for you for television, like the V-chip, where it's put in the hands of the parents or the educators. And then if it were in the hands of the educators the school board could approve certain guidelines. It's technically more difficult with the Internet. As you know, there are hundreds of new services being added to the Internet every week. It's growing at an explosive capacity and we're in the process actually of trying to develop an Internet II. But I think that is the answer. Something like the V-chip for televisions. And we're working on it. I think it's a serious potential problem myself. But let me say it would be a serious potential problem if they were not in the schools. I think putting them in the schools, because the kids are normally under supervision, you have a far less likelihood that the Internet will be abused or that the children will be exposed to something they shouldn't see during the school hours, in all likelihood, than at home. But I do think you need guidelines in both places and we're doing our best to try to figure out if there's some technological fix we can give you on it. BRIEFING BY SPOKESWOMAN ANN LEWIS (22 May): Q.: Three things that Clinton said - suggesting V-chips for the Internet, endorsing year-round schooling, and speaking favorably of high school competency tests before graduation. Are any of those new, or are those things he has said before? Ann Lewis: From my understanding, looking at the conversations back and forth on the V-chip for the Internet, as you know this is a principle the president has talked about for a long time, which is giving parents the tools they need, and it's the principle he referred to when he supported the - came out in support of the V-chip. He thinks it continues to be an issue. Second, if you go back and look at his speech on Net Day, when he gave a radio address and we did some talking about the Internet, he announced that he had asked the Department of Education and Secretary [Richard] Riley to come up with a parents' guide to the Internet, recognizing that it is a wonderful resource but that many families also feel they could use some help in ensuring that their children get the most out of the Internet. And, third, it's our understanding, and we just checked this with people at the White House who know much more about technology than all of us put together, that there is in fact technology being developed that would serve as the equivalent of a V-chip for the Internet, and we think that's what the president referred to. Q.: Clinton has talked before about giving parents ways to protect their children on the Internet, but has he ever before suggested the idea of a V-chip for the Internet? Lewis: Not that we know of, but we know - as is clear, I think, from his wording, he is aware that the technology has been developing. Q.: But has he talked about this before? Lewis: We don't think so. We were going to try to do a huge Nexis search; that's going to take a long time. We don't remember that conversation. Q.: You said the technology is being developed - who is developing it? Lewis: I can't, but we can get you more information. It's my understanding it's being developed within the industry. Q.: That's like the stuff like Kidsitter and all the stuff that's already available on the Internet. There are a lot of sites. Lewis: There are a lot of sort of monitors you can put on that. We think this may be a little more advanced, and we're trying to get more information. WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY MIKE MCCURRY AND SPOKESPMAN BARRY TOIV (23 May): Q.: Mike, yesterday the president endorsed the idea of a V-chip for the Internet. Was that the first time he did that, and how does the White House plan to proceed? Mike McCurry: Did anyone work on that yesterday? That was - there is some, I think, R&D work, technical work that's being done to develop new software. I'm not sure where within the government they're doing it=8A. Q.: Mike, I'm still trying to figure out, was yesterday the first time the president endorsed a V-chip for the Internet? McCurry: Did you do any yesterday on the V-chip question? Barry [Toiv] may have handled this up in West Virginia yesterday. Barry Toiv: Well, I'm not sure I have more than you got yesterday from Ann Lewis. The president has not specifically mentioned the V-chip, but this is work that we've been doing because he's been concerned, obviously, about ways that parents can help - can protect their kids with regard to stuff that comes through on the Internet. Apparently, it's our understanding that technology does exist within the industry. It's being developed by the industry. And so I think the president was referring to that yesterday. Q.: Is there any procedure that - I mean, is it something that - is there any kind of official "endorsement" you expect? Toiv: Well, right now - not right at this moment, but it's something we're looking at. ### Copyright 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated companies. All rights reserved. This transmission was brought to you by.... THE CDA DISASTER NETWORK The CDA Disaster Network is a moderated distribution list providing up-to-the-minute bulletins and background on efforts to overturn the Communications Decency Act. To SUBSCRIBE, send email to with "subscribe cda-bulletin" in the message body. To UNSUBSCRIBE, send email to with "unsubscribe cda-bulletin" in the message body. WARNING: This is not a test! WARNING: This is not a drill! ------------------------------ From: Dave Penkler Subject: Bandwidth is a Replacement For Switching. Shannon? Date: 29 May 1997 10:43:40 +0200 Organization: Hewlett Packard GmbH Germany Reply-To: "dave@valhalla.com" Dear Pat, Thanks for posting the latest George Gilder article: "FIBER KEEPS ITS PROMISE". Gilder is always a stimulating read, although I can't help thinking that the man is so articulate that he could well pull off a highly plausible theory on the dynamics of egg prices in China: "PERFECTLY TRUE". I do however have a little question concerning Mr. Gilder's source for attributing "bandwidth is a replacement for switching" to Claude Shannon. Appended are excerpts of three of Mr. Gilder's earlier articles in which makes this attribution. I have scoured Shannon's "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" in vain. So the question that I hope that you or one of your many readers can answer is: In which paper does Shannon state this equivalence and in what terms? Best Regards, Dave PENKLER --- THE BANDWIDTH TIDAL WAVE by George Gilder As the great pioneer of communications theory Claude Shannon wrote in 1948, bandwidth is a replacement for switching. FEASTING ON THE GIANT PEACH by George Gilder But what about switching, ask the critics of cable? Claude Shannon of MIT and Bell Labs, the inventor of information theory, had the answer in 1948: Bandwidth is a replacement for switching. GOLIATH AT BAY by George Gilder The logic of MIPS and bandwidth works both ways. Not only can processing make up for bandwidth, but bandwidth, as Claude Shannon pointed out in 1948, can serve as a substitute for switching and other computer functions. -- Dave PENKLER | E-Mail: Dave_Penkler@ph.com Telecom Systems Business Unit| Transpose p and h: ^^ Hewlett-Packard France | Telephone: +33 (0)4 7614 1446 5 av R. Chanas - Eybens | Fax: +33 (0)4 7614 5323 38053 Grenoble Cedex 09 | GSM: +33 (0)6 0715 0256 FRANCE | [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Of the several essays of Gilder in the Telecom Archives, I am not sure we have 'Feasting on the Giant Peach'. Since George is a regular reader and participant here, I will ask him to respond at this time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: marklund@agt.net (R. Marklund) Subject: Telecom Distance Education-Help? Date: 30 May 1997 05:05:31 GMT Organization: TELUS Communications Inc. Reply-To: marklund@telusplanet.net I'm interested in obtaining a Master's level degree via distance education in Telecommunications or Data Communications (eg. Masters of Science in Telecommunications or Masters of Telecommunications). I have only been able to find one possible program so far at the U of Colorado in Boulder. Can anyone suggest such a program? Any recommendations? Thank you in advance! Would prefer responses via email directly. Ron Marklund, P.Eng. Red Deer, Alberta, Canada email: marklund@telusplanet.net ------------------------------ From: dr@ripco.com (David Richards) Subject: Re: Need Help Dealing With Ameritech Date: 29 May 1997 03:30:57 GMT Organization: Ripco Internet, Chicago In article JRA writes: > All this is tedius and annoying, but it generally works OK. However, I > have been totally unable to get anywhere on an increasing number of > complaints coming from Ameritech customers. The problem is that > apparently Ameritech's business office has been given strict orders > not to make any comments about the cost of a call (what band it's in, > timed/untimed, _anything_) about calls from Ameritech exchanges to > MFS/Intellinet exchanges. They say that calls to an exchange operated > by MFS are priced by MFS, and that Ameritech has nothing to do with > billing for the call. Of course, when I talk to MFS they say this is > insane: the originating carrier charges, if the call needs to be > charged at all. And only the originating carrier will know whether or > not the tariff says the call is timed. This is a known difficulty with Ameritech, and as a relatively tiny customer of MFS, we have even less clout with either vendor than you do. ... > I'm at wit's end. I need two answers, and I don't know where to look > for them. First, I need to know why it is that Ameritech is unwilling > to confirm what band a call is in, if and only if it's to an MFS > exchange. Second, I need to know, in general, how I can find out if a > call from an Ameritech exhcange to an MFS one is timed or not. > I'd be eternally grateful for whatever light you can shed on this issue. Ameritech's motives in this are easy to guess. On the plus side, MFS has been very good about providing their customers with lists of their "Rate Centers" including the city, TCG exchange, and the other Ameritech prefixes served from the same switching station as the TCG exchange -- that's what you need in order to determine the actual Ameritech rate for the call. David Richards Ripco, since Nineteen-Eighty-Three My opinions are my own, IRS withstanding Public Access in Chicago Proud to be the 5,000th least-important Shell/SLIP/PPP/UUCP/ISDN/Leased usenet-abuser, by the unofficial GSUA. (773) 665-0065 !Free Usenet/E-Mail! ------------------------------ From: hillary@hillary.net (Hillary Gorman) Subject: Re: Warning: Scam Alert Date: 29 May 1997 14:53:30 GMT Organization: Packet Shredders Anonymous In , John R. Levine wrote: > This message was a 100% scam. The guy was trolling for credit card > numbers and, for people dumb enough to send him checks, cash. BUT ... CAUCE (Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email) is real. Please check out http://www.cauce.org to see the text of Smith's anti-spam bill (an extension of the anti-junk-fax law) and to read up on their activities. No financial contributions are requested, but ideas are! Lots of clueful people are involved in this project. hillary gorman......................................hillary@netaxs.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, CAUCE is real. I'm afraid that scam-artist gave them a bit of an undeserved black eye with his antics. Remember to keep the two separate. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 10:08:20 -0700 From: Lars Poulsen Subject: Re: AT&T/SBC merger A few of the comments have been critical of Reed Hundt's performance as FCC chairman. I must respectfully disagree. Unlike most of his predecessors in the office, Reed Hundt has been more of a visionary activist than a faceless lawyer. I have applauded his performance, not only because I share his and vice president Gore's belief that the modern telecommunications infrastructure, operated in managed competition is a vital national asset, but also because he has been a friend of the Internet, protecting the interests of the mostly small dynamic, often family-owned Internet service providers against the attempts of the larger telcos to manipulate tariffs to eliminate this upstart competition. Certainly, telcos have been critical of the regulatory oversight from chief Hundt and his commission. They have been disappointed that they could not badger Hundt into backing the corporate line that "more profitable telcos promotes investments that are good for the country", which they used so successfully to influence Congress to rewrite the Telecommunications Act to their liking behind closed doors. But Hundt protected the Internet Service Providers from being forced to pay per-minute access charges to receive phone calls. Hundt believed that there is such a thing as managing national resources for the public good (as distinct from maximizing corporate profits). Judge Harold Greene (who brokered the consent-decree in the AT&T anti-trust suit, and thereby created the new, competitive telephone system) was blasted by many in the industry as well as many political observers, who accused him of destroying the one true integrated system, but he had such a clear vision, and such a good understanding of the technology as well as the economics of the industry, that ultimately he succeeded in creating a new system, and he was such a stabilizing force, that there was no real need to rewrite the law, until his retirement was imminent; so too, I believe we shall ultimately remember Reed Hundt as Harold Greene's successor. As the Internet becomes a mainstream technology, it will need government regulation. Such regulation is needed to curb the junk e-mail problem, to broker reasonable interconnects (who pays settlements to whom), and to create an ordered domain name system to serve the USA. Such regulation must be implemented with an understanding of the technology and of the technical culture that has grown up around it, and which in itself an important resource. With Reed Hundt gone, I pray that his successor will be worthy of the task. Lars Poulsen lars@OSICOM.COM +1-805-562-3158 OSICOM Technologies (Internet Business Unit) (formerly RNS) 7402 Hollister Avenue Manager of Remote Access Engineering Goleta, CA 93117 Internets designed while you wait ------------------------------ From: Bob Khan Subject: Systems Rated: Your Opinions, Please? Date: 29 May 1997 16:37:18 GMT Organization: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com Reply-To: Khan I guess you'd call this a survey. I'm a salesrep for a small telephone systems retailer. We're not an "authorized" dealer of any company's equipment, preferring to keep our options open so that we can recomend the most appropriate system without worrying about meeting a quota. Our manager gives us tremendous discretion as to what systems we recommend to clients. I usually handle smaller businesses, looking for systems which can handle 2-12 CO lines and 4-32 stations. Typically I recommend AT&T Partners, Nortel CICS, and Toshiba DK16's. Just now looking into Panasonics. Also sold a few Prostars. In order to better serve my customers (and this should be beneficial to other independent retailers or dealers who are authorized on multiple systems), I'd appreicate any input on the advantages/disadvantages of various systems over others. For example, I've found the Partner is best for tiny businesses since I can install a single 206 module for starters, but the CICS is better for intermediate's due to the built-in auto attendant. Opinions based on EXPERIENCE, not company-issued hype, are obviously preferred. Anyone's comments are welcome: vendor, retailer, user, owner, etc. Finally, a simple ranking, based on cost/value would be appreicated. For example (and this is only as an example!): 1. Norstar 2. Toshiba 3. Panasonic 4. Prostar, etc. Thanks again for any input. Bob ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #139 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri May 30 09:14:08 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA18540; Fri, 30 May 1997 09:14:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 09:14:08 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705301314.JAA18540@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #140 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 May 97 09:14:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 140 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? (Ed Mitchell) Local Telephone Monopolies (Dave Wade ) Re: Stopping the Splits (Adam H. Kerman) Re: Stopping the Splits (Rick Ellis) Re: Stopping the Splits (nwdirect@netcom.com) Re: MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals (nwdirect@netcom.com) Re: Four-Year Recap Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming (Ken Jongsma) Re: ISP Diversification Plans (Jon Gauthier) Updated GSM-List 05/28/97 (Jurgen Morhofer) Re: AT&T/SBC Merger (Mike Gawdun) Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" (Rich Osman) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Ed Mitchell Subject: Re: Are Cordless' as Bad as Cellulars? Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 15:19:02 -0700 fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist) writes: > The main study on ham radio operators was conducted by Milham in > California and Washington. He used the FCC > records to look up the death rates for amateur radio operators from > 1979 to 1984. .... > He showed an excess of leukemia deaths (over what would be expected > from the general rate in the population) of 31 to (an expected) 24.3 > in California (Washington wasn't large enough to be significant). Milham's study on ham radio operators, according to many published reports, helped to excite on-going research on the biological impacts of RF and electromagnetic fields. Stewart Fist has presented this old study without interpretation, falsely leading many readers to conclude that ham radio causes cancer. Milham's study looked at a sample of death certificates of amateur radio operators. His study had no information on whether the licensee ever operated a radio; if they did, how often? How much power was used? What frequencies were involved? What type of communication was conducted? Where were antennas located with respect to the operator? What other contributing factors may there have been in this group? Did they smoke? Did they drink alcohol? Were they overweight? Did their work tend to involve close proximity to strong magnetic fields or expose them to other hazards? What was their socioeconomic status? It turns out that many ham radio operators work in technical fields and are exposed to hazards in the workplace (everything from RF, EMF to toxins). It has also been observed that the "average" amateur radio operator is older than the average age of the population and leads an excessively sendentary life style. Some of the ham's who's death certificates were examined may not have operated amateur radio equipment much at all yet this data was not collected by the Milham study. > These figures were all highly significant. But most significant of > all, was the acute form of Myelogeneous Leukemia (AML) which was > nearly double -- 15 cases compared to 8.5 (expected). I wish I had the study in front of me (I don't right now) but the study also showed a DECREASED expectation of certain other forms of cancer. I do have some of the references cited in one of the articles buried in my web site at http://www.hamradio-online.com Last I checked, the current thinking on this issue was that exposure to certain forms of magnetic fields - rather than RF - might be the culprit in many of these situations - it so happens that radio ops, radar ops, physiotherapists and others are also typically exposed to large magnetic fields associated with power supplies and other equipment. These issues should be studied but through controlled experiments. Quoting out of date epidemiological surveys harms the public understanding of this issue and can lead to government policy that is based on false assumptions and paranoia. As controls have been added to EMF and RF studies, the reported incidence of cancer and other disease has decreased. An Oct 1989 issue of Science showed that the reported incidence of alleged EMF/RF problems had cut in half since studies in the late '70s - due to better designed surveys and experiments. For example, some of the early studies identifying an increase in childhood leukemia based solely on proximity to power lines proved erroneous when it was later determined that no power was being sent through the lines. > And I must say that I am amazed at the intellectual inertia (and > outright denial) of technical people in resisting any suggestion that > these potential major health problems should be treated seriously and > researched vigorously. I don't think many folks here are arguing against doing research. The problem is that the people finding health associations with EMF (who your web site indicates you like) often have as many credibility problems as those on the defensive such as the CTIA and industry (people your web site indicates you do not trust). All of us need to review these issues with a healthy dose of skepticism. Large percentile increases in very tiny epidemiological numbers do not necessarily make a crisis. There is sufficient "good" data for you to use in raising these issues without resorting to the use of out of date surveys. Your use of such old studies leads many readers to question your own biases. Ed Mitchell, kf7vy http://www.hamradio-online.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 16:02:29 -0600 From: djw@physics.lanl.gov (Dave Wade ) Subject: Local Telephone Monopolies How much longer will it be before the local telephone monopoly here in the mountains of New Mexico is broken up? I'd really like to have a phone; but I refuse to buy one from U.S.West. I'd even settle for a Cellular Phone in my car. I bought a Range Rover from a fellow out in Los Angeles, and the Range Rover had a phone in it. He left the phone in the car, but I can't seem to get it hooked up. None of the local Cellular resellers or even the local company which controls the Cellular equipment that the resellers are reselling will talk to me. Everybody wants me to sign up for a year and they will give me a "free" telephone; but I can't use "both" telephones ... Why? Why me? I don't really hate the telephone company! Just because I live up in the mountains, and the only local calls I can make are to the two bars; and the bartenders don't know who I am ... Why me? Just because the telephone company decided that the eight party lines at forty dollars a month weren't bringing in enough money so they decided to sell single lines at seventy dollars a month and REQUIRE you to leave the eight party lines (that I couldn't afford anyway...) Dave [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Frontier will turn on your existing cellular phone without a contract. They will bill month by month and charge it to your credit card. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 02:32:16 CDT From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Jim Gottlieb wrote: >> someone has to stop this proliferation of area codes ... or the term >> will simply lose its meaning. > If they had just listened to me :-) years ago when I proposed 8-digit > dialing, then we wouldn't be in this mess today. Sigh. 6.4 billion numbers isn't enough? That's 40 for every adult in the NANP. ------------------------------ From: ellis@ftel.net (Rick Ellis) Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Date: 29 May 1997 10:27:54 GMT Organization: Franklin interNet http://www.ftel.net In article , Jim Gottlieb wrote: > In article , >> someone has to stop this proliferation of area codes ... or the term >> will simply lose its meaning. > If they had just listened to me :-) years ago when I proposed 8-digit > dialing, then we wouldn't be in this mess today. I can't help wondering just how many phone numbers are eaten by the practice of assigning a number to each incoming line even if they are in a hunt group. If an ISP puts 1000 lines in a POP, they get 1000 phone numbers. All they really wanted was one phone number. I don't get it. ------------------------------ From: nwdirect@netcom.com Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 21:51:46 GMT Jim Gottlieb (jimmy@sinden.info.com) wrote: > In article , >> someone has to stop this proliferation of area codes ... or the term >> will simply lose its meaning. > If they had just listened to me :-) years ago when I proposed 8-digit > dialing, then we wouldn't be in this mess today. 8-digit dialing is not needed nor will it ever be. Illinois area code 847 is 29% utilized and they are already crying out for relief. Just require that no one may reserve an entire exchange (10,000 numbers) unless they can prove they will have 80% of it utilized within one year (with severe penalties if they don't). Then and only then will the insanity stop. * Internet Access Providers - Web Presence Providers - BBSes * * http://www.thedirectory.org/ - largest directory on the web * * tens of thousands of listings - over 7,600 Access Providers * * Telephone Prefix Locations - "The BBS Corner" - Web Banner Creation * ------------------------------ From: nwdirect@netcom.com Subject: Re: MCI Cheats, Lies, and Steals Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 21:58:27 GMT joseph kim (jokim@cisco.com) wrote: > Oh, I also didn't mention MCI cut off my long distance without my > permission. > Actually, I couldn't get it turned back on until a few days after > they cut it off and so during the interim had to use 10xxx to get long > distance. When I asked MCI if they would pay for the extra charge over > $1.83/minute for using 10xxx since it was their fault they hung up on > me. IMO, MCI is one of the most dishonest LD companies out there. They too "officially" disconnected my long-distance service without telling me. Then when I made LD calls with 1-plus they still went through MCI but at the 10XXX rate which includes around a $1.25 surcharge for each call. Since most of my calls are in the one to two minute range the cost was exorbitant. Once I got my local bill and saw the charges I called the LEC and got the surcharges removed. Stay away from MCI. BTW, I have been very happy with Sprint. * Internet Access Providers - Web Presence Providers - BBSes * * http://www.thedirectory.org/ - largest directory on the web * * tens of thousands of listings - over 7,600 Access Providers * * Telephone Prefix Locations - "The BBS Corner" - Web Banner Creation * ------------------------------ From: ken.jongsma@das.honeywell.com (Ken Jongsma) Subject: Re: Four-Year Recap Re: New Toll-Free Number Coming Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 15:46:42 GMT Organization: Honeywell, Inc. - DAS Judith Oppenheimer wrote: [Judith's recap of 800 number history deleted to save bandwidth.] This seem to point out the fallicy of using of using special access codes to indicate billing proceedures. Wouldn't it be far better to use an unused "star code" to indicate the collect or callee pays status of the call? For example: *800 312 555-1234 The "owner" of any number could designate whether or not to automatically accept such calls. Ken ------------------------------ From: Jon Gauthier Subject: Re: ISP Diversification Plans Date: 29 May 1997 14:07:10 GMT Organization: General DataComm, Inc. Krishnan J. Iyer wrote in article ... > Did you know that "average fax costs of an United States Fortune 500 > company is US $ 15 million a year", according to 1996 Gallop / Pitney > Bowes study. > Also fax costs is about 41% of their total cost of telephone > communications. It is high time one should think of transferring fax > traffic to low cost networks like Internet. snip, snip ... > I appreciate your comments on "the future of faxing" and information > on your diversification plans. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You pose an interesting scenario. I > would like to hear responses if any from ISPs who have considered > this angle. PAT] I still am amazed by the fax craze. 95% of all documents faxed today originated in electronic form. Yet people still fire up Microsoft Word, print another copy, and fax it to it's destination, when they could just select File/Mail and e-mail the durn thing. Almost as absurd is to "print" to a fax server/modem. Now I realize there are cases where faxes are necessary -- signed documents or those with hand-written annotations. But in today's world, the majority of senders and receivers of faxes have e-mail accounts and mail gateways to the Internet. Now people want to send faxes over the Internet! Almost as bad as the Cells-in-Frames proposal for those people who want to encapsulate ATM cells in Ethernet frames (which will probably be transported over an ATM backbone ...) If I just had a thousandth of the money wasted on shoe-horning horse-and-buggy solutions onto today's interstate highways... Jon Gauthier Principal Network Engineer General DataComm, Inc. jon.gauthier@gdc.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 16:59:34 +0200 From: Jurgen Morhofer Subject: Updated GSM-List 05/28/97 For the latest edition of this list look at my Web-Site: http://www.cs.tu-berlin.de/~jutta/gsm/gsm-list.html kindly supplied by Jutta Degener. And if you're already on the Web, take a look at my commercial site: http://deltos.net/globaltel I really would appreciate your business! (Changes in the list marked by "*") Date 05-28-1997.=20 Country Operator name Network code Tel to customer service ------ ------------- ------------ ----------------------- Albania AMC 276 01 Andorra STA-Mobiland 213 03 Int + 376 824 115 Argentina Armenia Armentel Australia Optus 505 02 Int + 61 2 342 6000 Telecom/Telstra 505 01 Int + 61 18 01 8287 Vodafone 505 03 Int + 61 2 9415 7236 Austria Mobilkom Austria 232 01 Int + 43 664 1661 max.mobil. 232 03 Int + 43 676 2000 Azerbaidjan* Azercell 400 01 Int + 994 12 98 28 23 Bahrain Batelco 426 01 Int + 973 885557 Belgium Proximus 206 01 Int + 32 2205 4912 Mobistar 206 10 Bosnia Cronet 218 01 PTT Bosnia 218 19 Botswana Brunei DSTCom 528 11 Jabatan Telekom 528 01 Bulgaria Citron 284 01 Int + 359 88 500031 Burkina Faso OnaTel Cambodia CamGSM Cameroon PTT Cameroon Cellnet 624 01 Chile China Guangdong MCC 460 00 Beijing Wireless China Unicom 460 01 Zhuhai Comms DGT MPT Jiaxing PTT Tjianjin Toll Croatia HR Cronet 219 01 Int + 385 14550772 Cyprus CYTA 280 01 Int + 357 2 310588 Czech Rep. Eurotel Praha 230 02 Int + 42 2 6701 6701 Radio Mobil 230 01 Int + 42 603 603 603 Denmark Sonofon 238 02 Int + 45 8020 2100 Tele Danmark Mobil 238 01 Int + 45 8020 2020 Egypt Arento Estonia EMT 248 01 Int + 372 6 397130 Radiolinja Eesti 248 02 Int + 372 6 399966 Ritabell Ethiopia ETA 636 01 Fiji Vodafone 542 01 Int + 679 312000 Finland Radiolinja 244 05 Int + 358 800 95050 Telecom 244 91 Int + 358 800 17000 Alands Mobil France Itineris 208 01 Int + 33 1 44 62 14 81 SFR 208 10 Int + 33 1 44 16 20 16 Fr.Polynesia Tikiphone 547 20 Fr.W.Indies* Ameris 340 01 Georgia Superphone Geocell Germany D1, DeTeMobil 262 01 Int + 49 511 288 0171 D2, Mannesmann 262 02 Int + 49 172 1212 Ghana Franci Walker Ltd ScanCom Gibraltar GibTel 266 01 Int + 350 58 102 000 G Britain Cellnet 234 10 Int + 44 753 504548 Vodafone 234 15 Int + 44 836 1191 Jersey Telecom 234 50 Int + 44 1534 882 512 Guernsey Telecom 234 55 Manx Telecom 234 58 Int + 44 1624 636613 Greece Panafon 202 05 Int + 30 94 400 122 STET 202 10 Int + 30 93 333 333 Guinea Int'l Wireless Hong Kong HK Hutchison 454 04 SmarTone 454 06 Int + 852 2880 2688 * Telecom CSL 454 00 Int + 852 2888 1010 Hungary Pannon GSM 216 01 Int + 36 1 270 4120 Westel 900 216 30 Int + 36 30 303 100 Iceland Post & Simi 274 01 Int + 354 800 6330 India Airtel 404 10 Int + 91 10 012345 Essar 404 11 Int + 91 11 098110 Maxtouch 404 20 BPL Mobile 404 21 Command 404 30 Mobilenet 404 31 Skycell 404 40 RPG MAA 404 41 Usha Martin Modi Telstra Sterling Cellular Mobile Telecom Airtouch BPL USWest Koshiki Bharti Telenet Birla Comm Cellular Comms TATA Escotel JT Mobiles Indonesia TELKOMSEL 510 10 Int=A0+ 62 778 455 455 PT Satelit Palapa 510 01 Int + 62 21 533 1881 PT Kartika Excelcom 510 11 Iraq Iraq Telecom 418 ?? Iran T.C.I. 432 11 Int + 98 2 18706341 Celcom Kish Free Zone Ireland Eircell 272 01 Int + 353 42 38888 * Digifone 272 02 Int + 353 61 203 501 Italy Omnitel 222 10 Int + 39 349 2000 190 Telecom Italia Mobile 222 01 Int + 39 339 9119 Ivory Coast Ivoiris 612 03 Int + 225 23 90 00 Telecel 612 Comstar 612 01 Int + 225 21 51 51 Japan Jordan JMTS 416 01 Kenya Kenya Telecom Kuwait MTCNet 419 02 Int + 965 484 2000 La Reunion SRR 647 10 Laos Lao Shinawatra 457 01 Latvia LMT 247 01 Int + 371 256 2191 Lebanon Libancell 415 03 Cellis 415 01 Lesotho Vodacom 651 01 Liechtenstein Natel-D 228 01 Lithuania Omnitel 246 01 Bite GSM 246 02 Int + 370 2 232323 Luxembourg P&T LUXGSM 270 01 Int + 352 4088 7088 Lybia Orbit Macao CTM 455 01 Int + 853 8913912 Macedonia PTT Makedonija 294 01 Malawi TNL 650 01 Malaysia Celcom 502 19 * Maxis 502 12 Malta Advanced 278 ?? Marocco O.N.P.T. 604 01 Int + 212 220 2828 Mauritius Cellplus 617 01 Int + 230 4335100 Monaco Itineris 208 01 Int + 33 1 44 62 14 81 SFR 208 10 Int + 33 1 44 16 20 16 Office des Telephones Mongolia MobiCom Mozambique Telecom de Mocambique Namibia MTC 649 01 Int + 264 81 121212 Netherlands PTT Netherlands 204 08 Int + 31 6 0106 Libertel 204 04 Int + 31 6 54 500100 New Caledonia Mobilis 546 01 New Zealand Bell South 530 01 Int + 64 9 357 5100 Nigeria EMIS Norway NetCom 242 02 Int + 47 92 00 01 68 TeleNor Mobil 242 01 Int + 47 22 78 15 00 Oman General Telecoms 422 02 Pakistan Mobilink 410 01 Int + 92 51 273971-7 Philippines Globe Telecom 515 02 Int + 63 2 813 7720 Islacom 515 01 Int + 63 2 813 8618 Poland Plus GSM 260 01 Int + 48 22 607 16 01 ERA GSM 260 02 Portugal Telecel 268 01 Int + 351 931 1212 TMN 268 06 Int + 351 1 791 4474 Qatar Q-Net 427 01 Int +974-325333/400620 Romania * MobiFon 226 01 Int + 40013022222 * MobilRom 226 10 Int + 40012033333 Russia Mobile Tele... Moscow 250 01 Int + 7 095 915-7734 United Telecom Moscow NW GSM, St. Petersburg 250 02 Int + 7 812 528 4747 Dontelekom 250 ?? KB Impuls 250 ?? San Marino Omnitel 222 10 Int + 39 349 2000 190 Telecom Italia Mobile 222 01 Int + 39 339 9119 SaudiArabia* Al Jawal 420 01 * EAE 420 07 Senegal * Sonatel 608 01 Seychelles SEZ SEYCEL 633 01 Serbia Singapore Singapore Telecom 525 01 Int + 65 738 0123 MobileOne 525 03 Slovak Rep Eurotel 231 02 Int + 421 903 903 903 Globtel 231 01 Int + 421 905 905 905 Slovenia * Mobitel 293 41 Int + 386 61 131 30 33 Digitel 293 ?? South Africa MTN 655 10 Int + 27 11 445 6001 Vodacom 655 01 Int + 27 82 111 Sri Lanka MTN Networks Pvt Ltd 413 02 Spain Airtel 214 01 Int + 34 07 123000 Telefonica Spain 214 07 Int + 34 09 100909 Sweden Comviq 240 07 Int + 46 586 686 10 Europolitan 240 08 Int + 46 708 22 22 22 Telia 240 01 Int + 46 771 91 03 50 Switzerland PTT Switzerland 228 01 Int + 41 46 05 64 64 Syria SYR MOBILE 417 09 Taiwan LDTA 466 92 Int + 886 2 321 1962=20 Tanzania * Tritel 640 01 Thailand TH AIS GSM 520 01 Int + 66 2 299 6440 Tunisia Turkey Telsim 286 02 Int + 90 212 288 7850 Turkcell 286 01 Int + 90 800 211 0211 UAE UAE ETISALAT-G1 424 01 UAE ETISALAT-G2 424 02 Int + 971 4004 101 Uganda Celtel Cellular 641 01 Ukraine * Mobile comms Vatican Omnitel 222 10 Int + 39 349 2000 190 Telecom Italia Mobile 222 01 Int + 39 339 9119 Vietnam MTSC 452 01 Yugoslavia Mobile Telekom Pro Monte Zaire African Telecom Net Zimbabwe NET*ONE 648 01 Sincerely, Jurgen Morhofer Tel:+39-6-780-8093 GlobalTel Fax:+39-6-780-8777 If you would like to send a FREE fax anywhere in the world, go to our Web-site at: http://deltos.net/globaltel and click on the "Fax for free" button. ------------------------------ From: mike.gawdun@mindspring.com (Mike Gawdun) Subject: Re: AT&T/SBC Merger Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 12:43:15 GMT Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Thank you Lars for articulating the feelings of thousands of Reed Hundt supporters. Did you see the LA Times article on the ATT/SBC merger written by James Flanigan? It is about the 'mating of dinosaurs' and the coming dark age if the merger is allowed to go through. Thanks again! ------------------------------ From: osman@NTCSAL01DA.ntc.nokia.com (Rich Osman) Organization: Nokia Telecommunications Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 17:52:34 +0300 Subject: Re: "Good Morning, and Please Go Away" siegman@ee.stanford.edu (Anthony E. Siegman) wrote: > Says the article: "Systems capable of calculating individual customer > profitability will make it possible, for example, to let > less-profitable customers sit on hold longer when they call into a > telephone center." > Does that confirm your most paranoid fantasies? Yup, interesting. I've had an account with Nation's for about a year, and I've been pleased enough with the service that I was about to transfer all of my active bank funds to them. I guess I'll wait a while longer and see if the service declines. I'm currently matching at least two of their profile criteria (minimum balance and use of branches.) Oz (Rich Osman) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #140 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 31 08:35:10 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA09264; Sat, 31 May 1997 08:35:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 08:35:10 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705311235.IAA09264@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #141 TELECOM Digest Sat, 31 May 97 08:35:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 141 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 619 Split in 1999 (Tad Cook) Spamford's org (Dorothy Klein) Spam With 800 Numbers (Steven Lichter) Fallout From Spam Filter (Ken Levitt) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Michael Neary) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (James Carlson) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Steve Bunning) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Paul Rubin) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Andrew Crawford) Re: Stopping the Splits (Tim Russell) Re: Stopping the Splits (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Stopping the Splits (Brian Elfert) Re: Stopping the Splits (Stanley Cline) June 1: A Day For New Area Codes (Pierre Thomson) Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? (Fred R. Goldstein) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: 619 Split in 1999 Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 17:23:45 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) 619 Area Code To Split Again In 1999; Escalating Number Demand Pushes Relief Date Up By One Year SAN DIEGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 30, 1997 Due to increased demand for telephone numbers, another area code will be introduced in portions of southern San Diego County that now use the 619 area code. The new area code is expected to be in use as early as May 1999. This area code introduction will come two years after the 760 area code split off from the 619 area code in March of this year and one year earlier than previous projections due to unprecedented number demand. `The good news is that not everyone will have to change their area code in 1999,` said California Code Administrator Doug Hescox, who coordinates area code relief planning statewide for the telecommunications industry. `Only those customers who kept their 619 area code last time will be affected this time around. No 760 area code customers will have to change their area code. `Of course the downside is that anytime you introduce a new area code, it inconveniences customers. But there's no choice if we hope to meet the need for new phone numbers,` Hescox said. The 619 area code serves southern San Diego County, while the 760 area code now serves northern San Diego County and several other Southern California counties. That area code split occurred on March 22, 1997 and is still in the `get acquainted` dialing period which allows customers to use either the old 619 or new 760 to reach customers in the new 760 area code. Customers need to begin using the correct area code on Sept. 27, 1997. The 760 area code is expected to accommodate number growth for about eight years. Originally, the newly split 619 area code was not expected to split again until the year 2000. `However, the demand for telecommunications services far exceeded the industry's expectations, so we've had to move the next area code introduction date up by one year,` Hescox said. Hescox said the skyrocketing demand for new phone numbers is being seen not only in San Diego, but across the state. `California now has 15 area codes -- more than any other state -- and will need to add another eight by the end of 1998 to keep pace with demand,` Hescox said. Two primary factors driving that demand are local telephone service competition and the high-technology explosion. `With the onset of widespread competition in California's local telephone market in 1996, each new provider requires its own supply of phone numbers. In California, we have more companies entering local telephone competition than any other state. Further, the rising demand for fax machines, pagers, cellular phones, modems for Internet access and other high-tech equipment also is increasing the demand for phone numbers,` he said. A telecommunications industry group representing more than 30 companies is currently developing and evaluating various options for splitting the 619 into two area codes, known as a geographic split. In a geographic split, the existing area code is divided with part of the area keeping the existing area code and part receiving a new area code. Under California law, public participation and comment is obtained before the industry submits a proposed area code relief plan to the California Public Utilities Commission and administrators at Bell Communications Research (Bellcore), the organization that administers the North American Numbering Plan. Hescox said a series of meetings will be held before December 1997 to seek public comment and input on potential options for splitting the 619 area code. Locations, dates and times of the public meetings will be announced at a later time. Boundaries for the new area code, as well as the actual three-digit number, will be announced in 1998. The 619 area code serves the southern portion of San Diego County. Some of the cities in this area include the city of San Diego (except the San Pasqual Valley which is served by the 760 area code), Chula Vista, National City, Coronado, Del Mar, Solana Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, El Cajon, Rancho San Diego, Santee, Poway and portions of the unincorporated area of San Diego County, including Rancho Santa Fe, Spring Valley, Rancho San Diego, Lakeside, Alpine, Pine Valley, Jacumba and Campo. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 12:28:32 EDT From: Dorothy Klein Subject: Spamford's org AGIS's spammers (Cyberpromo, Sally/Nancy/Mary/BimboNet, quantcomm, and a couple others) hve formed (unwillingly?) an Internet Email Mass Marketing Coalition, or something like that -- IEMMC.org. They will allegedly keep an opt-out list through which all their spam must pass, and have vowed to pass all their spam through it, and only through it, and to not forge headers, use others' systems, etc. Agis says they'll not spam again until the list is working, June 3-5. Agis said this, oh, last Fridayish. Forged crap bearing the scent, or actual routing, of the above spam-domains has been reported by many netizens since then, including myself. "Business" as usual. It's pretty funny, watching Walt Rines (Quantcomm, the "administrator" of IEMMC) try to justify IEMMC/ its non-working opt-out mailto on its web-page/ its lies on its web-page AND ignore all the IEMMC members' violations of its charter, in his posts to news.admin.net-abuse.email. At least, it's funny the first three long-winded times. Now, it's tedious. So that's what's up. Later, Dorothy Klein The REAL dklein@pluto.njcc.com Accept No Imitations! * This address uses the NAGS filters against junk email. * See http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~ivl/nags/index.html for more info. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All those people are liars, so do not beleive anything they say until/unless you see it happening. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevenl@pe.net (Steven Lichter) Subject: Spam With 800 Numbers Date: 30 May 1997 19:08:46 -0700 Organization: PE.net - Internet access from the Press-Enterprise Company In an effort to help you learn about new products on the Internet that include 800 numbers so you don't have to pay for the call or waste postage. The following number will allow you to buy all kinds of spy cameras, 800-760-2447. Besure to ask for Nick and tell him what you think of his spammed E-mail. By the way, this clueless fool is using AOL to spam from. I guess it is ok for them to send out thousands of E-mails, but not get them. The following number will tell you how to become a Fortune 500 company; 800-811-2141, you must also put in the ID 13684 so that you will get all the information that you need and the fool who e-mailed using Cyberpromo.com gets the bill. It is suggested that you use a pay phone or large PABX while calling the number and remember it is against the law to harass. I don't get many at my primary E-mail address since we now have software in place that blocks most of the major Spam factory sites, but I have on address that is open to any fool that wants to spam it and if they include an 800 number or Fax number so that they can be reached I'll post it. *****LEGAL NOTICE TO ALL BULK E-MAILERS***** NOTICE TO BULK EMAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, 227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. I ALSO DON'T BUY FROM BULK E-MAILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 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 Macintoch computers. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 09:43:28 From: Ken Levitt Subject: Fallout From Spam Filter Today by chance, I happened to spot an unread copy of TELECOM Digest in my deleted mail folder. Digest v17 n136 was primarily devoted to discussions about spammers and something in my anti-spam filtering decided that this was a spam message. I guess I'll have to rework my filtering. Getting rid of spam gets harder and harder each day. Ken Levitt Note - All mail sent to the above address is deleted without me ever seeing it. If you want to reach me send to kl21@usa.nospam and replace the nospam with .net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is why I suggest never sending the output of a filter which is presumed to be all spam directly to /dev/null. It is better to send it all to a directory and leave it there until you get time to scan it quickly looking for legitimate email which may have gotten caught by the filter in error. Once you make a final 'approval' of what is in that directory then just delete the entire thing en-masse. Instead of deleting it however, you might want to use the idea suggested yesterday: take all the spam accumulated over a few days which has collected in the output of the filter, put it all together as one huge file, then email it back to a couple spammers of choice. Make sure the header information is correct; the object is to get it bouncing back and forth forever between the autoresponder of one spammer and the autoresponder of another spammer. Make sure your own address is nowhere in sight! That stuff bouncing back and forth -- if it gets returned to you -- will slow your own mail down to a crawl and take up every bit of available disk space in a hurry. What you want is for two or three spammers to pass it back and forth until *their* mail slows down to a crawl. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 11:20:58 PDT From: Michael Neary Organization: Xerox Corporation, El Segundo, CA Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Pat, In an earlier Digital press release, the "superior price" of this magic modem is $600. A careful reading makes it clear that their "invention" needs two seperate phone connections (33.6K each) to achieve 67K. The claim of "without the installation and associated expense" of ISDN is interesting, since the required second phone line won't be free. It'll be interesting to see how many ISPs are willing to let customers use two dialup channels at a time. Their patented "Simple Analog Channel Sequencing" should be interesting reading: I've seen free or cheap software for Win95 which binds two serial data streams into one. This also sounds a lot like what they did to get "live" Apollo 11 landing pictures from the dishes in Spain back to NASA for processing. That was 1969. (It's in the TELECOM archives.) With 33.6 modems selling for as low as $55, this works out to $490 for the software. Mike ------------------------------ From: James Carlson Date: Fri, 30 May 97 09:24:33 EDT Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available > Below is a press release sent to me recently regarding a new modem > now available which is extremely fast. It should make it a lot > easier to get massive amounts of spam out on the net faster than > ever before! .... if you are not interested in reading a > press release praising new modem technology, then stop reading > here and delete this message. In a word -- unlikely. I had technical discussions with the marketing genius who came up with this dual-modem-in-a-box idea several weeks ago. He seemed unaware that people can already get this performance -- and can get it for free, and can get it without investing in his proprietary technology. The solution is something called "Multi-link PPP" or MP, and is publicly documented in RFC 1990. This protocol is built into virtually ever terminal and communications server sold today (which is the box that people are usually connecting to when they dial into their local ISP), and is supported by many user-level systems as well (such as MS Windows95), and works great to combine together two modem links into one double-speed access line. In other words, the idea's not new, and this particular solution is not compatible with the freely-available solutions that are already in common use in the marketplace. I know of nobody in the server end of the world (where many of those annoying spammers get their net access) who plans to support this protocol. It would thus require dedicated hardware on the part of the ISP for each user who wants to dial in. This seems like an unlikely investment for most ISPs. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 09:21:42 -0400 From: Steve Bunning Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available You wrote: > ROCKLEDGE, FLORIDA...May 27, 1997...Transend Corporation advanced > modem speeds to new heights, without the need for digital connections > at either end, with their announcement today of the Transend > Sixty-Seven, delivering speeds of 67 kbps both upstream and > downstream, over existing analog phone lines. A very intesting claim. Most "analog phone lines" are converted at some point to a 64 kbps digital stream (or an even lower rate with robbed bit signalling). It would be a true technical miracle to get 67 kbps of data through a 64 kbps data pipe. The only way this modem could possibly work would be on a true end-to-end analog connection or through some form of data compression. If the modem requires an end-to-end analog connection, then I doubt you will every see 67 kbps in normal dial-up use. If it uses compression, then the performance is not remarkable. It's not April 1 is it? * Steve Bunning | ACE*COMM | 301 721-3023 (voice) * * Product Manager | 704 Quince Orchard Road | 301 721-3001 (fax) * * TEL*COMM Division| Gaithersburg, MD USA 20878 | sbunning@acecomm.com * * NASDAQ:ACEC | "CDRs in Real-Time" | WWW= www.acecomm.com * ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 02:13:26 -0700 From: phr@netcom.com (Paul Rubin) Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Organization: Netcom On-Line Services In article <05.30.97.988e32q4@telecom-digest.org> is written: > Below is a press release sent to me recently regarding a new modem > now available which is extremely fast. It should make it a lot > easier to get massive amounts of spam out on the net faster than > ever before! .... if you are not interested in reading a > press release praising new modem technology, then stop reading > here and delete this message. Why the heck did you post this ad? Since when is multiplexing two modems on two phone lines new technology? The Telebit Netblazer was doing that in the 80's, and it wasn't new then either. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 11:06:58 +0000 (GMT) From: Andrew Crawford Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available On Fri, 30 May 1997, TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Below is a press release sent to me recently regarding a new modem > now available which is extremely fast. It should make it a lot > easier to get massive amounts of spam out on the net faster than > ever before! .... if you are not interested in reading a > press release praising new modem technology, then stop reading > here and delete this message. Isn't this "technology" already available? It's sometimes called "Using Two Modems" :) Andrew ------------------------------ From: russell@probe.net (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Date: 30 May 1997 19:55:45 GMT Organization: Probe Technology Internet Services ellis@ftel.net (Rick Ellis) writes: > I can't help wondering just how many phone numbers are eaten by the > practice of assigning a number to each incoming line even if they are > in a hunt group. If an ISP puts 1000 lines in a POP, they get 1000 > phone numbers. All they really wanted was one phone number. I don't > get it. Not necessarily true -- by the time most ISPs get to 1000 lines, they're using channelized T1's, if not PRI circuits. We're in the process of installing our eighth T1, and each circuit (with 24 voice channels) has only one phone number. A good thing, too, since in the process of all this, we discovered that Northern Telecom DMS-100 switches will only busy-forward over four lines, then will stop. I won't go into the mess of describing the workaround. Suffice it to say that it's ugly. Tim Russell System Admin, Probe Technology email: russell@probe.net "The worst censorship is self-censorship, because fear has no limits." -- Grady Ward ------------------------------ From: fgoldstein@bbn.|nospam.|com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Date: 30 May 1997 20:47:53 GMT Organization: BBN Corp. In article , ellis@ftel.net says: > I can't help wondering just how many phone numbers are eaten by the > practice of assigning a number to each incoming line even if they are > in a hunt group. If an ISP puts 1000 lines in a POP, they get 1000 > phone numbers. All they really wanted was one phone number. I don't > get it. That generally applies to analog lines, not digital ones. And ISPs who have a lot of analog lines in a hunt group are ISPs with unhappy customers and/or a huge maintenance headache. With our large ISDN PRI hunt groups, we have a single set of numbers (a small DID block or Multiple Subscriber Numbers, as required; generally only a few) for the group as a whole. The individual PRIs do NOT have numbers. This does make incoming testing a little harder, but that's how it works. At least on the DMS, I'm told (I don't know the 5E's equivalent limit), we *could* assign each PRI or small group of PRIs a "test" number, and have the real number point to this "hunt of hunts". But there can only be 14 numbers in that "hunt of hunts", and each PRI is treated as a hunt automatically. We have lots more than 14 PRIs in lots of hunt groups. So we end up with more than 100 channels/number in many cases. What really eats numbers? The requirement that each *rate center* ("exchange area") have a separate prefix code for EACH local exchange carrier. With LEC competition, if you have five LECs in a 1000-line town, with the Incumbent LEC having 900 lines and four LECs averaging 25 each, you'd still need 5 prefix codes. The fix is obvious, to allow codes to be shared among LECs, but right now the switch software routes to the switch based on the prefix code. It would need an enhancement (not rocket science, but not trivial) to make it route on, say, the first digit after the prefix. Then of course there are the pagers that have their own numbers (rather than PIN codes behind a single number, as SKYPAGE does). Plus the fax servers that assign a separate number for each employee, so one server can pretend to be a "personal fax machine" for each user. And so on and so on. Had we envisioned these uses of numbers forty years ago, the country might have adopted a more flexible numbering plan. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein"at"bbn.com BBN Corp., Cambridge MA USA +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: belfert@citilink.com (Brian Elfert) Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Date: 30 May 97 17:03:47 GMT ellis@ftel.net (Rick Ellis) writes: > I can't help wondering just how many phone numbers are eaten by the > practice of assigning a number to each incoming line even if they are > in a hunt group. If an ISP puts 1000 lines in a POP, they get 1000 > phone numbers. All they really wanted was one phone number. I don't > get it. We will be switching to MCI in a few weeks. If we wanted our channelized T1s to be trunkside (to all 56K modems to work), we could only be assigned a single phone # for the entire hunt group. I told them that this wouldn't be a problem. It'll save 47 phone numbers initially. Brian ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 16:24:46 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com On 29 May 1997 10:27:54 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom ellis@ftel.net (Rick Ellis) wrote: > I can't help wondering just how many phone numbers are eaten by the > practice of assigning a number to each incoming line even if they are > in a hunt group. If an ISP puts 1000 lines in a POP, they get 1000 > phone numbers. All they really wanted was one phone number. I don't > get it. For channelized T1's, where a "line" is a multiplexed analog line, yes, there is almost always one directory number per line. Many ISPs are switching to PRI (ISDN primary rate) lines, though, and for these types of lines, telcos will either assign no "plant test" numbers at all (my employer/ISP has run into that repeatedly with GTE) or will assign one per PRI span (23 lines.) Reason: It's uncommon to find a single DS0 channel in a PRI span out of service (although it has happened a few times), and therefore one directory number per DS0 is silly and wasteful. With Ascend Maxes and USR Total Control modem chassis, where modems are dynamically mapped to PRI DS0s (instead of having a DS0 always mapped to the same modem, a call on a single DS0 could hit any one of up to 48 modems) there isn't any need for PTNs per DS0 to test modems -- just one per PRI. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! CLLI MRTTGAMA42G NPA 770 ** (wk) scline(at)mindspring.net (hm) roamer1(at)pobox.com ** http://www.pobox.com/~roamer1/ **NO SPAM!** http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ and http://www.cauce.org/ ------------------------------ From: Pierre Thomson Subject: June 1: A Day For New Area Codes Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 08:50:26 -0400 Organization: Mid Hudson Valley Network Reply-To: mmommsen@mhv.net Get ready for the biggest day of new area codes in history! On June 1, 1997: New NPA 973 splits off 201 in northwestern New Jersey New NPA 732 splits off 908 in east central New Jersey New NPA 340 splits off 809 in the U.S. Virgin Islands New NPA 868 splits off 809 in Trinidad & Tobago New NPA 240 overlays 301 in western Maryland New NPA 443 overlays 410 in eastern Maryland For more details and exchange lists for all of these new area codes, visit the following URLs: http://frodo.bruderhof.com/areacode/ http://www.lincs.net/areacode/index.html Pierre Thomson Telecom Manager Rifton Enterprises ------------------------------ From: fgoldstein@bbn.|nospam.|com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: What Constitutes a Second Residential Line? Date: 30 May 1997 20:53:16 GMT Organization: BBN Corp. Picking up on an old thread, I have looked at the FCC's actual Report and Order, now available in HTML (and other formats) on their very handy web page. So what's a second line? Essentially, they've stated that they don't have a specific answer yet. This is one of several loose ends to the access charge decision that still has to be worked on. They also stated that if a telco really really opposed making this distinction, they are permitted to treat all residential lines as primary; however, they are generally not allowed to make up the revenue elsewhere. I suppose in some cases a telco might consider this a valid marketing expense, or a write-off against the cost of administering a primary/secondary distinction. Expect to hear more as this gets ironed out by year end or so. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein"at"bbn.com BBN Corp., Cambridge MA USA +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #141 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sat May 31 09:10:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA11159; Sat, 31 May 1997 09:10:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 09:10:12 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705311310.JAA11159@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #142 TELECOM Digest Sat, 31 May 97 09:09:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 142 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: ISP Diversification Plans (Barry Margolius) Re: ISP Diversification Plans (Anthony Argyriou) Re: ISP Diversification Plans (Rick Strobel) Re: 60,000 "No-AOL" Addresses ... $59.95 (Peter Morgan) Re: AT&T/SBC Merger (Julian Macassey) Re: AT&T/SBC Merger (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: Local Telephone Monopolies (Dave Wade) Re: Local Telephone Monopolies (David Esan) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Lord Somnolent) Spamming: Why do They do it? (Chuk Gleason) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: bfm@pobox.com (Barry Margolius) Subject: Re: ISP Diversification Plans Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 16:16:49 GMT Organization: INTERNET AMERICA Yeah it's shoe-horning, but it's necessary shoe-horning. For example, my mother's two doctors both have fax machines, and neither has email. I read an interesting article on the Internet about drug interactions with a drug that she is taking. So I just faxed it to them both, and my internet fax provider was a great help. My only other choice was to print, photocopy, and mail it to them. Will they ever have email? I hope so, but I wouldn't bet on it. So, from my perspecitve, it's not wasted shoe-horning. Unless you're prepared to demand that everybody has email (and reads it), we still need older, alternative methods of delivery. barry > Now I realize there are cases where faxes are necessary -- signed documents > or those with hand-written annotations. But in today's world, the majority > of senders and receivers of faxes have e-mail accounts and mail gateways to > the Internet. Barry F Margolius, New York City (speaking for himself, not his employer) bfm@pobox.com For PGP Key, finger bfm@panix.com ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: ISP Diversification Plans Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 03:39:26 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com On 29 May 1997 14:07:10 GMT, Jon Gauthier wrote: > I still am amazed by the fax craze. 95% of all documents faxed today > originated in electronic form. Yet people still fire up Microsoft > Word, print another copy, and fax it to it's destination, when they > could just select File/Mail and e-mail the durn thing. Almost as > absurd is to "print" to a fax server/modem. > Now I realize there are cases where faxes are necessary -- signed documents > or those with hand-written annotations. But in today's world, the majority > of senders and receivers of faxes have e-mail accounts and mail gateways to > the Internet. This is _not_ true in businesses outside the computer industry. I work in the geotechnical consulting industry -- most companies have only recently acquired e-mail addresses, and many do not have individual addresses for individual employees. Corporations have set up procedures to cope with faxes -- there is usually a person who is responsible for receiving, collating, and distributing faxes in the office, and companies which are too small to give this duty to a secretary/receptionist usually have all their employees within earshot of the fax machine. To acheive equivalent ease for e-mail, the company would have to remain logged on during business hours (48 to 56 hours in many companies), which isn't cheap; and would have to assign someone the job of retrieving e-mail, transferring important files to other employees' computers (many companies don't network their computers, so this means walking over a disk). This costs money which many companies cannot afford. To make matters worse, not every company in my business has yet given in to the MSOffice hegemony. One firm I work with e-mailed me a couple of documents in Lotus and WordPerfect formats. All of these had important formatting embedded which does _not_ translate easily. It gets worse when dealing with graphic files, since Autocad is not yet the universal standard among engineers. E-mail is also still not entirely reliable. Most e-mail arrives within five minutes of it's being sent, but sometimes someone's mail-spool holds stuff for hours (especially AOL). If a fax didn't go through, you _know_ it didn't go through. > Now people want to send faxes over the Internet! Almost as bad as the Despite my ranting, faxing via internet _is_ moronic! You lose the advantages of faxing without obtaining the advantages of e-mail. Anthony Argyriou http://www.alphageo.com ------------------------------ From: rstrobel@infotime.com (Rick Strobel) Subject: Re: ISP Diversification Plans Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 10:43:58 GMT Organization: InfoTime, Inc. In article , Jon Gauthier wrote: > I still am amazed by the fax craze. 95% of all documents faxed today > originated in electronic form. I am amazed that you are amazed. First, it probably would be more accurate for you to state that "in my corner of the world ... 95% of all documents faxed today originate in electronic form ...". > Yet people still fire up Microsoft > Word, print another copy, and fax it to it's destination, when they > could just select File/Mail and e-mail the durn thing. Almost as > absurd is to "print" to a fax server/modem. Let's see, how would this play out for an office worker in a small business: Since I don't have an email program that's integrated with Word I'll need to copy the text into an email message window. Oops -- there goes all the formatting and it's associated meanings, email is plain text only. Hey, maybe the receiver has Netscape mail, I can send an HTML formatted message. Either way, it will only take me 20 minutes to reformat the text for either format. Now, my email is ready to go. OK, now I need to go get on Mike's machine because he's the one with the modem and the dial up Internet account. This will only take about 10 minutes. Cool, I logged right on to the net, no busy signals today! After doing all this the user still doesn't know if the message arrived. I've seen Internet email take 4 - 5 hours to arrive, sometimes it's instantaneous, sometimes it never arrives. Sending a fax and receiving a confirmation would have taken all of ten minutes -- max. They predicted that TV would wipe out radio and newspapers, that video stores would kill movie theatres, email would replace fax. Rick Strobel | | InfoTime Fax Communications | Fax-on-Demand | 502-426-4279 | & | 502-426-3721 fax | Fax Broadcast | rstrobel@infotime.com | Services | http://www.infotime.com | | ------------------------------ From: Peter Morgan Subject: Re: 60,000 "No-AOL" Addresses ... $59.95 Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 10:42:01 +0100 In message Jay R. Ashworth quoted: >> To order the 600k "AOL-Free" E-Mail List with your Visa or >> MasterCard: >> 1. Order online NOW, at http://www.windansea1.com/noaol.htm >> 2. Telephone Orders call 619-558-0756 If five others are willing to put up $10, I'll buy this and put it up on a web site (which is pretty empty at the moment - and in the UK), and make the list available for download so as to allow all and sundry to check whether they are on the list ... (Or, since there may be a copyright issue if I did that) will answer any enquiries about whether your email addresses are on the list, to allow you (via me, to complain back to them, that you wish your details to be excluded from ANY FURTHER lists they have, and I'll use our Data Protection Act to ask them whether they have passed on those details, and if so, to whom! so you can also request they remove your details and check who else they have sold the details to.) I'd offer to buy it myself, in full, but have just had a change in circumstances that leaves me 60% down in income for the moment, but it means I now have some 20 days a month where I can work for myself and develop web sites etc :-) I must stress that I have no wish to use the information for sending messages to anyone! The web site I'll be working on first will be including details of not-for-profit UK organisations (charity shops etc, and not in itself of much interest to those outside the UK, nor profit making) - it is for something useful for me to do. http://www.uk-places.org/ which currently has an unrelated index page listing a few telecom-related sites (such as Pat's) will be the web site, and you can do a "whois" check on it quite easily. Peter Morgan - NAGROM Networks / PO Box 580 / Wrexham / UK LL11 1XH Mail me regarding this at: spam@uk-places.org http://homepages.enterprise.net/nagrom/index.html http://www.ultranet.com/~pgm/sf-cafe.html ------------------------------ From: julian@netcom.com (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: AT&T/SBC Merger Organization: Hand Made Bread Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 15:59:55 GMT Allow me to add my perspective on the SBC/AT&T merger. Before SBC actually consummated the deal between Pacific Bell and SBC, the two companies were in negotiations re te getting into the Long Distance business. The Pacific Bell System perspective was to resell a full LD carrier (Sprint) and own maybe one Northern Telecom 250 for handling Credit card calls, "Private networks" etc. The SBC perspective was they were going to build a LD network (and Frame Relay networki and LD T1) from the ground up. They wanted to own the network. Seeing as they wanted to roll this out by Sept 97, anyone can see they obviously were dreaming. But, someone in mahogany row had the "vision" of being a major player in the LD business. I assume someone explained that switches and cables do not come from the Supermarket and it could take years to build a LD company from the ground up. So? If you can't build one by Sept 97 and still want to fill in the little box in teh Spreadsheet, why not buy one? MCI has just been bought by BT, Sprint keep saying they are not for sale. That just leaves AT&T. Bob Allen has made enough wrong, stupid decisions, that being bought SBC would just be another one. You know that Allen will earn millions from this. Julian Macassey, 415.647.2217 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 12:26:39 -0700 From: Jeffrey Rhodes Subject: Re: AT&T/SBC Merger PAT: I have been using the URL approach to comp.dcom.telecom (sorted the way you like it, by date). It appears that the digest is updated in batches and unread postings usually appear green and only turn to red after I attempt to download an article. OTOH, I am certain that some new postings first appear in red and at times I cannot find the original blah,blah,blah posting for a Re:blah,blah,blah. How did the posting for Subject: AT&T/SBC Merger get started? I see a posting for Subject: AT&T, Pac Tel, SW Bell to Merge? Actually, I am interested in how a posting for this subject became involved with the resignation of the FCC's head. Did Reed Hundt resign because of the possibility of an AT&T merger with SBC or is this just some rumor started in another newsgroup? Is this newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom some kind of subset of comp.dcom.telecom.tech? Do you pick postings from other newsgroups and repost them here (if so, which other newsgroups)? Thanks, Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com Mike Gawdun previously wrote Re: AT&T/SBC Merger in the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom: Thank you Lars for articulating the feelings of thousands of Reed Hundt supporters. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do NOT use, nor is this newsgroup a subset of comp.dcom.telecom.tech ... the two newsgroups are not related. Occassionally there will be a cross posting. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 11:15:32 -0600 From: djw@physics.lanl.gov (Dave Wade) Subject: Re: Local Telephone Monopolies > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Frontier will turn on your existing > cellular phone without a contract. They will bill month by month and > charge it to your credit card. PAT] http://www.frontiercorp.com/products/wireless/cellular/plans.html Pat, I called Frontier Communications in Illinois; and then the "800 number" on the web-page listed above, (i.e. 1-800-270-1731 ) and the first was nonplused, (but wanting/willing to help,) and the second was quite adamant that "you wouldn't want to sign up with us, we only do Rochester, New York. So, did I get the wrong "Frontier"? There is a pay phone provided by some COCOT with "Cherokee" in its name, and they might be usable around here. But the only number I can find for = them is the number the phone dials to deposit its money. Nobody human ever answers that phone. They are not listed in local phone books. I lied. There is a listing. I'll call them now. They clearly are small. When I called she accepted the collect call, but took my number to call me back. They must be tiny. And she hasn't yet called back. 10:50am Well, it's been twenty minutes, or so ... So it looks like they aren't interested in local lines; just pay-phones. And installing a pay-phone in my family room, or in my car, doesn't seem to be reasonable. So, how about a little more "contact information" on "Frontier"? Dave [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 800-594-5900 is 'Call Home America' which is a division of Frontier. Use that number to reach them. I will get $25 in credit for each referred customer so give them my number for referral purposes, 847-329-0571. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Esan Subject: Re: Local Telephone Monopolies Date: 30 May 1997 18:54:12 GMT Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services djw@physics.lanl.gov (Dave Wade) wrote: > How much longer will it be before the local telephone monopoly here in > the mountains of New Mexico is broken up? I'd really like to have a > phone; but I refuse to buy one from U.S.West. > I'd even settle for a Cellular Phone in my car. I bought a Range Rover > from a fellow out in Los Angeles, and the Range Rover had a phone in > it. He left the phone in the car, but I can't seem to get it hooked > up. None of the local Cellular resellers or even the local company > which controls the Cellular equipment that the resellers are reselling > will talk to me. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Frontier will turn on your existing > cellular phone without a contract. They will bill month by month and > charge it to your credit card. PAT] Maybe in Chicago. But here in Rochester (the corporate home of Frontier) that is not the case. In fact, when my contract with CellOne was up I contacted Frontier to see if they had a better rate. The salesdrone looked at me, quoted me a higher monthly price, and higher per minute charge, and told me that they did not offer free nights and weekends. Oh yes, and their local calling area is much smaller. I asked him why I should switch, and he replied to get the Frontier quality! Needless to say, I am on a month to month basis still with Cell One. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See my other message. Go to the division of Frontier known as 'Call Home America' 800-594-5900. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 17:00:13 -0400 From: Lord Somnolent Organization: KoB Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? The Old Bear wrote: > Unlike analog cellular service, which is supported by fewer than > 15,000 towers nationwide, the next-generation digital cellular -- > known as PCS -- will require more than 100,000 cellular towers to > provide reliable service. More than 300 communities already have > revolted, imposing moratoria on cell tower construction, and the > movement is growing. > Fueling the problem are fears that property values will be adversely > affected by the giant structures and suspicions that cellular > transmissions can cause increased instances of leukemia and other > health problems. IIRC, the USPS has resolved to allow transmission towers on their properties, although they are subject to local building codes of course. Still, it hasn't been proven tht cellular transmissions cause any harm (hasn't been disproven either). If they do cause harm, remember that the effects decrease with the square of the distance, so if point B is twice as far from a tower as point A, electromagnetic effects are four times less at point B than A. Worcester has had reservations about installing new cellphone towers, even in the less developed areas. Many residents think they should be in Leicester, or Paxton. I vote for Paxton, because of its high hill, and because property values are already low thanks to Title V. Although when you live on said hill, you can get interference. WAAF transmits about a quarter mile away from my house, and you can hear it in the background on the phone, TV, radio (when on different station, although you may be only able to pick up WAAF), and it did cause problems with a Commodore VIC-20 I had. Effects vary depending on where in this house you are. Its a good think I like WAAF. ------------------------------ Subject: Spammming: Why do They do It? From: chuk.gleason@digvel.rtp.nc.us (Chuk Gleason) Date: Fri, 30 May 97 10:03:00 -0400 Organization: Digital Velocity BBS RTP, NC 919-992-3059 Reply-To: chuk.gleason@digvel.rtp.nc.us (CHUK GLEASON) Patrick - I'll try to spare you quoting, if you'll bear with me as I ask some questions: Why do people like Spamford do what they do? What's in it for them? It seems like, in fact has been described in the same terms as 'Get rich quick' schemes you see in the classifieds of cheap magazines. The only person getting rich is the guy who starts the chain ... And of course, it takes your resources to respond, either positively or negatively, or to put URL's etc. into your filters. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: An excellent idea! Let's get the > various autoresponders started going after each other. Take any > two spammers and create a set of mail headers showing each of > them as the 'From:' and 'Reply-To:' on the other set of headers. Hee - Hee - Hee!! I love it!! As you've implied, a taste of their own medicine. >> Senator Murkowski of Alaska just today introduced a bill (S771) into the >> US Senate to control spam. >> in routing info (no spoofed addresses, etc) and also mandates that the >> first word in the Subject line be the word "advertisement" so promail >> filtering would be MUCH easier. It also mandates that the name, address and >> phone number of the actual sender be in the spam message itself. > Murkowski's bill does nothing about the theft of services that spam > represents to service providers. Spammers would still free to abuse > the bandwidth, CPU time, and disk space of ISP's. A procmail-type > filter can throw the message away once it arrives, but by then it's > too late. Like so many congress-critters and others when confronted with new technology they can't understand, they try the 'old' methods of dealing with it and attempting to regulate it. > This message was a 100% scam. The guy was trolling for credit card > numbers and, for people dumb enough to send him checks, cash. Seems rather like the dudes who dumpster-dive for credit card numbers in people's trash. It works, but Gawd, what a way to live. No sense of shame. Well, I guess these people have no or little conscience. But again, why do they do it? It's beginning to seem to me that Spamford, et al., probably spend as much time in a day trying to scam other people as you and I spend working at a decent job. Maybe I'm just asking 'Why is there air?' 'Why do bank robbers rob banks instead of working for a living?' 'Why do we make war?' I realize now this question is for the psychologists and psychiatrists, but this list certainly should be concerned with the issue 'why' because, again, an 'active' response is necessary. And many an innocent business has been burned by the likes of Spamford, thinking they were getting a great customer list or whatever for very little. Ah, the power of a knowledgeable crook over an honest innocent. But, I just had to ask. It might give a new clue in how to fight Spam. Chuk Gleason chuk.gleason@digvel.rtp.nc.us ... Too many people confuse free speech with loose talk. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #142 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Jun 1 09:04:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA23701; Sun, 1 Jun 1997 09:04:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 09:04:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706011304.JAA23701@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #143 TELECOM Digest Sun, 1 Jun 97 09:04:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 143 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Backhoe Fade in L.A. (Tad Cook) Fraudulent International Calling Scheme: Refunds for Victims (Nigel Allen) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Randall H. Smith) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Barry Margolin) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Adam Frix) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Brett Frankenberger) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Ron Schnell) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Tom Betz) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Barry Margolin) Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List ... (Henry Mensch) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Backhoe Fade in L.A. Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 23:17:36 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Telephone service cut to 2,000 Los Angeles, Beverly Hills customers LOS ANGELES (AP) -- About 2,000 Los Angeles and Beverly Hills lost telephone service Saturday when a backhoe snagged on cable at a construction site, a Pacific Bell spokesman said. Service was not expected to be restored to all customers until 6 p.m. Sunday, said Pac Bell spokesman David Dickstein. Meanwhile, the Beverly Hills and Los Angeles police departments beefed up patrols in the affected area, in case any of those who lost phone service needed to report an emergency, authorities said. Those needing assistance could also go to Fire Station 58 at 1556 S. Robertson Blvd., said Los Angeles Fire Department spokesman Jim Wells The accident occurred at a west Los Angeles construction site at 7:15 a.m. Saturday, when an independent contractor caught a backhoe on a copper cable, and accidentally stretched the cable 20 or 30 feet, Dickstein said. The contractor was not working for Pac Bell and an investigation into the matter was under way, he said. "For many, the phone is a lifeline, and that's why we are really concerned" Dickstein said. Pac Bell hurried to replace 1,800 feet of cable, he said. The situation remained frustrating for many, if not nerve-wracking. "It's a problem," said resident Joan Leon. "We can't even call 911 if there's an emergency." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 15:54:59 EDT From: Nigel Allen Subject: Fraudulent International Calling Scheme: Refunds for Victims Here is a press release from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. While I do not work for the U.S. government, I found the press release on the FTC web site and thought that it would be of interest to readers of this Digest. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/9705/lubell2.htm FOR RELEASE: MAY 28, 1997 FTC GARNERS $111,000 REDRESS FOR VICTIMS OF FRAUDULENT INTERNATIONAL CALL SCHEME Defendants who allegedly ran a fraudulent scheme that lured consumers into making lengthy and expensive calls -- unknowingly -- to Guyana or the Caribbean, have agreed to pay a total of $111,000 in consumer redress to settle Federal Trade Commission charges against them. The FTC had alleged in December that Daniel B. Lubell, doing business as Mercantile Messaging and DB&L, Inc., solicited consumers to call what turned out to be international numbers to enter a free Hawaiian vacation sweepstakes and to obtain information about free or discount travel. According to the FTC, however, Lubell did not inform consumers that they would incur a significant charge -- up to $2.33 a minute, or more than $30 for listening to the entire message -- on their telephone bill, that even after calling they could enter the sweepstakes only by mail, or that they first had to buy an airline ticket to benefit from the information he was selling. The FTC alleged that the defendants' practices violated the FTC Act and the FTC's Telemarketing Sales Rule. The settlement, in addition to requiring the redress payment, prohibits similar violations in the future. Lubell lives in Bettendorf, Iowa, where corporate defendant DB&L is located. Mercantile Messaging L.L.C. is based in Rock Island, Illinois, but also has used a Moline, Illinois, address. The Wisconsin Attorney General's office joined the FTC in its lawsuit against Lubell and his companies, and is a party to the settlement. The FTC's Telemarketing Sales Rule prohibits a variety of deceptive and abusive telemarketing sales practices. It requires telemarketers to disclose up front the fact that they're making a sales call and the nature of the products and services being offered. It also requires telemarketers to disclose cost and other information before they ask consumers for any money. This settlement makes clear that the Telemarketing Rule applies to audiotext services. Audio information and entertainment programs that consumers access by dialing telephone numbers other than those beginning with the "900" prefix are not covered by another Commission rule, the 900 Number Rule, because they were not covered by the underlying statute. The 900 Number Rule requires cost disclosures in advertisements for such numbers, requires cost and other important disclosures in a free introductory message for 900-number services, and gives consumers the right to dispute charges for calls without endangering their credit records. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 authorized the Commission to broaden the rule to cover additional audiotext services that are susceptible to the unfair and deceptive practices it prohibits. The FTC initiated a rule amendment proceeding in March that could result in such an expansion. "International audiotext schemes have grown dramatically in the recent past as scam artists try to evade the 900 Number Rule's cost-disclosure and free preamble message requirements," said Jodie Bernstein, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "But the defendants didn't get away with it in this case, which was the first federal action targeting a deceptive international audiotext service. The settlement we have negotiated requires Lubell and Mercantile Messaging to turn over a substantial amount of their assets and to abide by broad restrictions on future business practices. Whether we will extend the 900 Number Rule to cover international audiotext services is under review, but in the meantime, this case shows that the FTC stands ready to enforce other laws prohibiting deception in the audiotext industry." Prior to the advent of international audiotext services, consumers accessed interstate audiotext services by dialing a 900 number and intrastate audiotext services by dialing a 976 number. While international audiotext services are not inherently deceptive, according to the FTC staff, they grew as fraudulent sellers searched for ways to offer audiotext services without having to abide by the 900 Number Rule's disclosure requirements. To get paid for the information or entertainment they sell to consumers, these services depend on revenue sharing arrangements with overseas telephone companies, whereby the audiotext sellers collect, through a third party which negotiates such deals, a portion of the long distance rates that show up on consumers' telephone bills. In the Lubell case, the FTC alleged, the defendants received 37 cents a minute for a 15-minute, repetitive, recorded message that explained how to get bumped from oversold flights in order to obtain free airline tickets. The message also gave consumers an address to which they had to write in order to get an entry form for the sweepstakes, and told them that Lubell and his firms do not charge for the information they provide, the FTC alleged. "The longer the call, the greater the fee, and the larger the cut received by the inter national audiotext seller, so the incentive is to keep consumers on the line as long as possible," Bernstein said. "Our advice to consumers is to be aware that, when they dial a telephone number beginning with 011 or with one of the many new Caribbean area codes, such as 809, 758 or 664, they are placing an international call and will be billed at international rates." A free FTC consumer brochure titled "International Telephone Number Scams" offers additional advice. It is free at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/tmarkg/intlphon.htm on the FTC's web site. Upon filing of the FTC complaint, the federal district court granted the FTC's request for a temporary restraining order halting the scheme and freezing the defendants' assets. The settlement -- a stipulated final order -- ends the litigation. The stipulated final order: prohibits the defendants from using any false or misleading representations to solicit the purchase of audiotext services, including false claims that consumers may enter a sweepstakes by dialing an audiotext number, and requires them to clearly and conspicuously disclose that a call is not necessary to enter the sweepstakes; prohibits the defendants from claiming that they will provide information about how to fly at no expense on commercial airlines unless they clearly and conspicuously disclose any costs consumers will incur to take advantage of the information; prohibits the defendants from misrepresenting that they do not charge or do not receive consideration for information they provide through their telephone numbers; prohibits the defendants from violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule, specifically requiring them to disclose the maximum charge a caller would face and all information the caller would need to determine the exact cost before the call is placed; requires the defendants to disclose the total cost of the call in a preamble message no longer than 15 seconds, and in reasonably understandable language, at the beginning of each audiotext call; and requires the defendants to turn over $111,000 within 10 days. If refunds to consumers are impractical, the funds will be turned over to the U.S. and Wisconsin Treasuries. The Commission vote to accept the settlement for filing in court was 5-0, with Commissioner Mary L. Azcuenaga dissenting from paragraph VIII of the order. The settlement documents were filed and entered May 27 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, Davenport Division. NOTE: This stipulated permanent injunction is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the defendant of a law violation. Such settlements have the force of law when signed by the judge. Copies of the settlement, other documents associated with this case, and the International Telephone Number Scams brochure are available from the FTC's web site at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC's Public Reference Branch, Room 130, 6th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580; 202-326-2222; TTY for the hearing impaired 202-326-2502. To find out the latest news as it is announced, call the FTC NewsPhone recording at 202-326-2710. MEDIA CONTACT: Bonnie Jansen or Claudia Bourne Farrell Office of Public Affairs 202-326-2161 or 202-326-2181 STAFF CONTACT: Bureau of Consumer Protection Eileen Harrington, 202-326-3127 Patricia Howard, 202-326-2321 (FTC File No. X970013) (Civil Action No. 3-96-CV-80200) forwarded to comp.dcom.telecom by Nigel Allen, 8 Silver Ave., Toronto ON M6R 1X8, Canada (416) 535-8916 ndallen@interlog.com http://www.interlog.com/~ndallen/telecom.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 09:03:19 -0500 From: Randall H. Smith Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? The Old Bear wrote: > Unlike analog cellular service, which is supported by fewer than > 15,000 towers nationwide, the next-generation digital cellular -- > known as PCS -- will require more than 100,000 cellular towers to > provide reliable service. More than 300 communities already have > revolted, imposing moratoria on cell tower construction, and the > movement is growing. No, no, no. PCS will _not_ need "100,000 cellular towers;" it _might_ need more _antennas_ but this does NOT correlate to more _towers_. Since PCS is really being rolled out as a deluxe cellular service today, even the number of towers needed is less than 800 MHz, analog cellular, since digital is more robust ... PCS in general also uses less RF power - some systems (notably CDMA) use _far_ less RF power, on the range of tens of milliwatts and even down into the microwatt range. At some point, the PCS providers will begin to use micro, pico and nano cells; these will cover only very small areas (also using _very_ small amounts of RF); the chances of you spotting one of these will be very small indeed. Randall H. Smith Motorola, Inc. smithrh@cig.mot.com Cellular Infrastructure Group Product Information Group Digital Systems Division x2-7707 Arlington Heights, IL USA ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? Date: 31 May 1997 12:05:54 -0400 Organization: BBN Planet, Cambridge, MA In article , The Old Bear wrote: > More than 300 communities already have revolted, imposing moratoria > on cell tower construction, and the movement is growing. My town newspaper has had several articles recently on the negotiations taking place with PCS companies. If my interpretation is correct, the law doesn't allow communities to prevent tower construction. However, it does allow them to specify where the towers may be constructed, and negotiate payment for the use of town property. Although there's some NIMBY feeling, allowing towers to be installed on places like fire stations is apparently seen as a money-making proposition. Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com BBN Corporation, Cambridge, MA Support the anti-spam movement; see ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 08:21:54 -0400 From: Adam Frix <70721.504@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? oldbear@arctos.com writes: > WHERE DO YOU PUT 100,000 CELL PHONE TOWERS? > Unlike analog cellular service, which is supported by fewer than > 15,000 towers nationwide, the next-generation digital cellular -- > known as PCS -- will require more than 100,000 cellular towers to > provide reliable service. More than 300 communities already have > revolted, imposing moratoria on cell tower construction, and the > movement is growing. Here in central Ohio, where Aerial Communications has started up, there was a story in the paper not too long ago about PCS providers entering into agreements with the local power company, American Electric Power, for putting PCS antennae and equipment onto existing electric transmission towers. --Adam-- ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 19:47:22 GMT In article , Steve Bunning wrote: > You wrote: > A very intesting claim. Most "analog phone lines" are converted at some > point to a 64 kbps digital stream (or an even lower rate with robbed bit > signalling). It would be a true technical miracle to get 67 kbps of data > through a 64 kbps data pipe. > The only way this modem could possibly work would be on a true end-to-end > analog connection or through some form of data compression. If the modem > requires an end-to-end analog connection, then I doubt you will every see > 67 kbps in normal dial-up use. If it uses compression, then the > performance is not remarkable. > It's not April 1 is it? As others have pointed out, it works by using two dial connections and running each at 33.6KBps. And as other have also pointed out, a much better way to do this is with multilink PPP. However, most modem manufacturers today understate their effective speeds (when running in async mode) anyway. The new "56KBps modem" technonogy, when it actually runs at 56KBps on the wire, can handle close to 70KBps "effective" async throughput *without compression*. This is because "modern" modulation protocols are synchronous on the analog side, so the start and stop bits don't need to be sent across the wire. So if you stream 70000 bits per second out the serial port, that's: 70000 / (8 data bits + 1 stop bit + 1 start bit) = 7000 bytes per second On the wire, that corresponds to 7000*8=56000 bits per second. Of course, there is a bit of overhead ... so you might really only be able to go 67000 ( :) ) async bits per second without compression. So it wouldn't be too terribly inaccurate to call a 56K modem a 70K modem. (Of course, the above reasoning only applies to async data. But that's what the majority of dial modems are used for anyway.) - Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ------------------------------ From: ronnie@twitch.mit.edu (Ron Schnell) Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Date: 31 May 1997 20:29:58 GMT Organization: MIT In article James Carlson writes: > I had technical discussions with the marketing genius who came up with > this dual-modem-in-a-box idea several weeks ago. He seemed unaware > that people can already get this performance -- and can get it for > free, and can get it without investing in his proprietary technology. > The solution is something called "Multi-link PPP" or MP, and is > publicly documented in RFC 1990. This protocol is built into I'm curious ... do any of these protocols work for more than two lines? I am one of the people who is "grandfathered" into the unmetered local ISDN here in BellSouth territory. Unfortunately, I will be moving my office ten miles away in about two months, and will lose this stats, thus bringing my telco charges from $50 to over $700. I would much prefer to buy eight modems (four for me and four for my ISP) and eight phone lines with unmetered usage. While we are on the subject ... anyone know of any way to get out of losing my unmetered status? It seems so unfair that just because I am moving they can charge me so much more. #Ron ------------------------------ From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Date: 31 May 1997 11:50:03 -0400 Organization: Society for the Elimination of Junk Unsolicited Bulk Email Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com Quoth Steve Bunning in : >> ROCKLEDGE, FLORIDA...May 27, 1997...Transend Corporation advanced >> modem speeds to new heights, without the need for digital connections >> at either end, with their announcement today of the Transend >> Sixty-Seven, delivering speeds of 67 kbps both upstream and >> downstream, over existing analog phone lines. > A very intesting claim. Most "analog phone lines" are converted at some > point to a 64 kbps digital stream (or an even lower rate with robbed bit > signalling). It would be a true technical miracle to get 67 kbps of data > through a 64 kbps data pipe. You must have missed it -- this modem employs TWO phone lines, hence TWO such pipes. Tom Betz, Generalist ant to send me email? First, read this page: ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Date: 31 May 1997 11:52:23 -0400 Organization: BBN Planet, Cambridge, MA In article , Andrew Crawford wrote: > Isn't this "technology" already available? It's sometimes called "Using > Two Modems" :) Furthermore, it seems like it would be difficult to use with most modem pools. In general, you dial into a hunt group, and get a modem at random. How would this new modem ensure that the two calling lines get connected to the two lines that are connected to the same modem at the destination? I suppose the answering modem could be an integrated set of modems, with some way of recognizing the identity of calling modems and figuring out which pairs go together dynamically. This was solved by Netblazers by doing the multiplexing at the IP routing layer, rather than at the link layer. But if this new modem is designed to be used with ordinary PC SLIP/PPP drivers, it can't operate this way. Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com BBN Corporation, Cambridge, MA Support the anti-spam movement; see ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 13:01:28 PDT From: henry mensch Reply-To: henry mensch Subject: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List ... ... and you make it available freely on the web ... then having $60 won't be the gating factor to send anyone on that list junk mail anymore. In turn, this could open the floodgates to those folks listed on that list. # henry mensch / po box 14592; sf, ca 94114-0592 / # http://www.q.com/henry/ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #143 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jun 2 22:22:47 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA17319; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:22:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 22:22:47 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706030222.WAA17319@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #144 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Jun 97 22:21:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 144 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telephone Franchises Instead of Monopolies/Competition? (Louis Raphael) Spam with 800 Numbers - The List (Jay R. Ashworth) AT&T 35-Cent Payphone Surcharge (Dave Levenson) WorldCom Dispute In Indiana (Ed Ellers) More on LA Phone Outage (Tad Cook) Another New Area Code To Be Introduced in 310 Region In 1999 (Mike King) Beth Arnold Revenge Spam (Beth Arnold) In Poor Health Again (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 13:02:49 EDT From: Louis Raphael Subject: Telephone Franchises Instead of Monopolies/Competition? This is my idea for creating a compromise between regulated monopolies and free-for-all competition in the local telephone market. I've been thinking of it for a while, and finally wrote it out in an evening - so there may still be a few inconsistencies. I'd appreciate getting feedback, etc. Note that to e-mail me, you must remove the "spammy" from my e-mail address. I hate forging my address, but in this age of spam, I don't have much choice. --L --------------- A New Proposal for Competition in the Telephone Industry: Franchises This proposal is based on two principles: (1) Generally speaking, free-market competition is a good thing; (2) There are some situations, however, where physical constraints override (1). Some public utilities, such as telephones, are cases in point. (The most extreme case I can think of is railroad tracks.) The examples referred to in this post are principally related to the North American situation, although they could apply anywhere. Previous to any sort of competition in the field of telephony, telephone services were generally controlled by the "Bell" companies, with some oversight by Federal and Provincial/State regulators. This system resulted in an good communications network, but for one point: long-distance charges have been, and continue to be, way overpriced. The theory behind this has been that local service (considered almost a necessity), is subsidized by the high charges for long distance services (considered a luxury). This wasn't necessarily a bad idea, except for the fact that it has resulted in absurdly high costs for long-distance services, which continue even with the advent of long-distance competition. We might hope for some help from the regulators, but they tend to be partial to the interests of the telephone companies over those of the consumers. It is also somewhat distasteful for a community (or even a whole province/state) to be "tied" to one provider of telephonic services, essentially in perpetuity. Another problem has been that, with guaranteed profits (here in Canada, the CRTC almost directly determines the Bell's profits), there is relatively little incentive to offer high initial-cost services in remote regions, such as Internet services. The alternative so far considered has been to allow competition. Mostly for technical reasons (I would say, regardless of the legalese involved), this was first attempted with long-distance services. The results have not been up to expectations, although they haven't been disastrous, either. Considering the true cost of providing long-distance services (as evidenced by the cost of Internet bandwidth), the cost of long-distance services is still too high. Also, new "features" have arrived, mostly in the area of fraud: slamming, billing irregularities, false advertising, 10XXX scams and other well known variations. Local-service competition is still in its infancy and may yet remain that way. While it is practical, and even desirable, to have multiple networks between cities, running multiple cables to every home is certainly no easy task. The building of the current telephone network was the work of a generation. The technicalities of interconnections between different providers of local telephone service are still complex, and will probably remain that way for the foreseeable future. ``Competition,'' so far, has usually meant the reselling of ILEC services, co-location of equipment, taking over of subscriber pairs, and so on. Even if, in time, technical limitations were overcome to a greater extent, there would still remain the problem of the final loop - from the Central Office to the customer. There is only so much room on the utility poles and utility tunnels. Telephone service is vital to modern society, which cannot easily function without it. Unreliable telephone service, which is fast becoming a side-effect of the current situation, is likely to be alot more costly in terms of lost business and annoyance than overpriced ``Ma Bell'' services. So far, the regulated monopoly model vs. the competitive model, have been seen as the only options. This is not so. It should be possible to set up a ``local franchise'' model. The franchise model would divide the country into telephone service ``blocks,'' which would be reasonable districts of subscribers. These would likely correspond somewhat to municipal boundaries, although one ``block'' might include more than one municipality, in those cases where municipal boundaries are somewhat artificial, or where municipalities would be too small to provide a viable base. A good basis for divisions would probably be current telephone exchanges, with the grouping together of several exchanges in one block, where necessary to provide a reasonable-sized pool of subscribers. Only one local telephone entity would be allowed to operate in a ``block'' at a given time. This entity would be chosen on a competitive basis however, unlike the present system of regulated monopoly. The residents of the district would be organized into a telephone cooperative (much as many telephone cooperatives are organized today). From this perspective, they could choose to either run their own service (as the cooperatives do today), or contract out the operation to a telephone company. The telephone bill would include two portions - a portion for capital expenses (a new switch, for example), which would be paid and owned by the subscribers, and operating expenses, which would be the cost of the contract with the telephone company. A telephone committee would be responsible for making capital purchase regulations, and for negociating the contract with the telephone company. The actual result of this idea is the devolving of regulatory authority to the local level. This committee would also negociate with surrounding communities for the provision of local toll-free zones, and perform other similar duties. Every telephone district would be required to provide one or more Interconnection Point(s) for long-distance companies to connect to. Possibly, this Interconnection Point could also be used for other purposes, such as the interconnection of cellular, PCS, and surrounding community networks. By keeping the size of the ``telephone communities'' large enough, long-distance companies would have an advantage in connecting to as many communities as possible. Not all long-distance companies would connect to all communities, as is the case today, but the problem could be solved as it now, by reselling the services of other carriers for that purpose. National/Provincial/State regulators would have a role in ensuring fair play in the long-distance market, as well as acting to guarantee a minimum level of service to all communities nationwide (perhaps by providing a ``minimum'' contract for all telephone companies to provide to all districts), and having the power to intervene in situations where the services provided are not adequate. I think that such a system could work. It might be difficult to set up in the short-term, but would probably be viable in the long- term. Proof of this is provided by the independents that have endured throughout the ``dark ages'' of Bell hegemony, and remain active to this day. Here in Canada, they vary in size from the City of Thunder Bay Telephone Department, down to single-exchange telcos with two-three pages of telephone-book listings, along with a variety of unusual situations (I think that Abitibi-Price operates some of the telephones in Iroquois Falls). A much better, and even more encouraging example, is the situation in Iowa, where telephone services are provided by a collection of independent telephone companies and cooperatives, which associate as "Iowa Network Services" - a system which has resulted in Iowa being among the first states to have state-wide availability of Internet services, for example. Converting to such a system would not be easy. It would probably best to do it over a period of time, ``liberating'' districts to their subscribers patchwork-style, and learning from those mistakes before the next batch. Some temporary regulations defining concepts like local-calling area might be necessary until committees begin negotiating among themselves. It may also be a good idea to introduce the committees some time before ``liberation.'' One of the major problems that I foresee would be the need for a system of checks-and-balances to prevent telephone companies from taking over committees - again, there may be roles for the regulator to play here. Also to be solved is the issue of compensating incumbent telcos for their investments in the local infrastructure - a problem which would probably produce a great increase in employment for accountants. The expectation is that the ILEC would generally remain in position, being in a situation where they know the local area, and their employees are familiar with the local network (a tangible benefit not to be discounted). This is fine, and should probably even be encouraged. The idea is to provide the *option* and the *choice* for residents to terminate their ``servitude'' to a given telco, if they feel that the service is abominable (or overpriced). In other words, to allow the carving of new independents from Bell (I'm using "Bell" when I should probably be using "ILEC") territory, where the situation warrants, and as a competitive incentive for ILECs to provide good, reasonably-priced service. Louis ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Spam With 800 Numbers - The List Date: 1 Jun 1997 21:17:26 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates [ Article crossposted from comp.dcom.telecom.tech,alt.dcom.telecom ] [ Author was Gordon S. Hlavenka O- ] [ Posted on Fri, 30 May 1997 18:19:06 -0500 ] Steven Lichter wrote: > The following number will tell you how to become a Fortune 500 > company; 800-811-2141, you must also put in the ID 13684 so that > you will get all the information that you need... Here are some other numbers guaranteed to help you live a better life through financial enrichment, religious enlightenment, a better diet, wonderful consumer products, or any number of other methods. I'm sure these are all reputable firms, as the mail I received from them was quite sincere. I know that you are all busy people out there, but perhaps the next time you're at an airport payphone with an hour to kill you might want to call them all, so that you could be assured of a perfect life! (800) numbers: 259-7003 X350 275-1913 294-9638 322-1669 X5460 541-3010 press 1, then X118 597-2824 685-8010 687-0600 X348277 779-8461 783-7363 X728 784-7282 810-4244 817-5192 935-5171 X5462 942-9304 X21154 995-0796 X5707 (888) numbers: 403-0307 424-3453 800-4197 There's also an exciting fax-on-demand system at (800) 729-0962 And a PAGER at (800) 759-8888 PIN 128-4050 Gordon S. Hlavenka www.crashelex.com gordon@crashelex.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Some of us still think it's important. Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "To really blow up an investment house requires Tampa Bay, Florida a human being." - Mark Stalzer +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ Subject: AT&T 35-Cent Payphone Surcharge Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 19:38:55 EDT From: Dave Levenson Organization: Westmark, Inc. Reply-To: dave@westmark.com An AT&T Press Release dated May 30, 1997 announced that AT&T is about to begin charging consumers an extra 35 cents per call for all non-coin calls originating at payphones. This includes calls dialed to 1-800-CALL-ATT, 10288+, or unadorned 0+ calls from payphones which route calls to AT&T by default. The charge applies whether the payphone is owned by a local exchange carrier or an independent payphone provider. They state that this charge is to recover the amount that they are now required to pay to the owner of the payphone for such calls. They also mention in the release that they are attempting to take legal action against the FCC order requiring such compensation. Finally, they state that because this amount is passed along to payphone owners, AT&T makes no profit from it. Several interesting points come to mind: AT&T has traditionally paid a percentage of its revenue from payphone calls to the payphone owner (if it is an independent payphone provider) or directly to the property-owner where the phone is located (for utility-owned payphones). The percentage varies, but for our small COCOT route, averages more than 35 cents per call. They have, for all intents and purposes, discontinued these commission payments. Now, the FCC says AT&T (and other carriers) must compensate the payphone owner at 35 cents per call. This is less than they used to pay -- but now AT&T will pass this cost along to the consumer, even though they never did that before! So AT&T is making no profit on it? The same FCC order which mandates payments to payphone owners removes utility-owned payphones from the subsidized rate-base. This means that the rates paid by consumers for local telephone service should no-longer include a subsidy for the payphones operated by the local exchange carrier. It also removes this subsidy from the access charge paid to the LEC by AT&T and other inter-exchange carriers. AT&T's costs, for every call, payphone or not, should be reduced ... are they passing this reduction in their costs along to consumers? This move puts AT&T in much the same position as Cleartel, AMNEX, Opticom, Telecom-USA, and other operator service providers. The amounts vary, but most of the other OSP's apply per-call surcharges which are paid to, or shared with, the payphone owner or location owner. AT&T has, for years, advertised that the way to avoid these surcharges is to use the AT&T network. Not any more! As I see it, this is not a revenue-neutral move by AT&T. In fact, they are paying payphone operators less than they used to, they are paying the LECS less than they used to, and they are charging the consumer more than they used to. What they are doing, I believe, is attempting to swing public opinion behind their legal battle to override the FCC payphone order. They would prefer to continue to use payphones without having to pay -- that is, they would prefer that the FCC allow them to continue stealing the use of the payphones. After all, who are the largest payphone-owners? Who stands to receive the lion's share of the per-call compensation? The RBOC's, of course! And who is AT&T now fighting every step of the way over the long distance market? Those same RBOC's. What do you think? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. Voice: 908 647 0900 Web: http://www.westmark.com Stirling, NJ, USA Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 14:59:50 -0400 From: Ed Ellers Subject: WorldCom Dispute In Indiana The Associated Press reported this weekend that WorldCom Network Services has obtained a court order to prevent angry landowners from cutting its lines. This is the latest round of a dispute that began after WorldCom began installing a 200-mile fiber-optic cable through Indiana (from a point near Terre Haute to one near Cincinnati, passing south of Indianapolis) following an old Gulf Oil pipeline. Most of the landowners along the route accepted a standard offer of $250 from WorldCom, but some were able to negotiate for far higher payments. When some landowners in Morgan and Vigo counties held out for more money, WorldCom bypassed them by running the cable along county roads; county courts then ruled that that land was private property and WorldCom was trespassing. The landowners' attorneys then advised their clients that they could dig up the WorldCom line starting Friday; WorldCom rushed to Federal court for an injunction after that. The story quotes a resident of Morgan County as describing WorldCom's actions as theft, and a WorldCom attorney as describing the landowners's suits as extortion. ------------------------------ Subject: More on LA Phone Outage Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 19:45:06 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Pac Bell works to restore telephone service in Los Angeles, Beverly Hills LOS ANGELES (AP) -- About a quarter of the people who lost telephone service in Los Angeles and Beverly Hills over the weekend were back in touch by Sunday afternoon, a Pacific Bell spokesman said. An estimated 2,000 customers lost service Saturday when a backhoe snagged on cable at a construction site, said Pac Bell spokesman David Dickstein. About 500 of those were restored by 4 p.m., and Dickstein estimated that the company would have 80 percent restored by 6 p.m. Full service was not expected to completed until about midnight. The accident occurred at a west Los Angeles construction site at 7:15 a.m. Saturday, when an independent contractor caught a backhoe on a copper cable, and accidentally stretched the cable 20 or 30 feet, Dickstein said. Pacific Bell originally thought that about 1,800 feet of cable would need to be replaced, but it ended up being only 300 feet, Dickstein said. Beverly Hills and Los Angeles police departments had beefed up patrols in the affected area, in case any of those who lost phone service needed to report an emergency, authorities said. A Los Angeles police dispatcher said Sunday there had been no unusual problems. Those needing assistance were asked to go to Fire Station 58 at 1556 S. Robertson Blvd. Late Sunday, nobody had come by the station requesting help, said Los Angeles Fire Department spokesman Bob Collis. Dickstein said the damage done -- including the cost -- would be the responsibility of the construction company and its contractor. He said he did not know the name of the company. "What it comes down to is that the construction company, or the independent contractor did something they shouldn't have done," Dickstein said. "We haven't finalized our investigation but all fingers point to that source." ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: Another New Area Code To Be Introduced in 310 Region In 1999 Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 11:21:13 PDT ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 18:33:25 -0700 From: sqlgate@pactel.COM Subject: Another New Area Code To Be Introduced in 310 Region In 1999 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 30, 1997 FOR MORE INFORMATION: Bonnie Ward (916) 972-3019 Another New Area Code To Be Introduced in 310 Region In 1999 Escalating Telephone Number Demand Pushes Relief Date Up By One Year Editor's Note: The following news release was issued by the California-Nevada Code Administration, an independent group that coordinates statewide area code relief planning on behalf of the telecommunications industry. Final decisions on area code policy issues are made by the California Public Utilities Commission. Pacific Bell reprints such news releases as a public service to our customers. LOS ANGELES --Due to increased demand for telephone numbers, another area code will be introduced in portions of southwestern Los Angeles County that now use the 310 area code. The new area code is expected to be in use as early as May 1999. This area code introduction will come 2 1/2 years after the 562 area code split off from the 310 area code in January of this year and one year earlier than previous projections due to unprecedented number demand. "The good news is that not everyone will have to change their area code in 1999," said California Code Administrator Doug Hescox, who coordinates area code relief planning statewide for the telecommunications industry. "Only those customers who kept their 310 area code last time will be affected this time around. No 562 area code customers will have to change their area code. "Of course, the downside is that anytime you introduce a new area code, it inconveniences customers. But there's no choice if we hope to meet the need for new phone numbers," Hescox said. The 310 area code serves the southwestern portion of Los Angeles County, while the 562 area code now serves the southeastern part of Los Angeles County and small portions of Orange County. That area code split occurred on Jan. 25, 1997 and is still in the "get acquainted" dialing period, which allows customers to use either the old 310 or new 562 to reach customers in the new 562 area code. Customers need to begin using the correct area code on July 26, 1997. The 562 area code is expected to accommodate number growth for about 10 years. Originally, the newly split 310 area code was not expected to need another new area code added until the year 2000. "However, the demand for telecommunications services far exceeded the industry's expectations, so we've had to move the next area code introduction date up by one year," Hescox said. Hescox said the skyrocketing demand for new phone numbers is being seen not only in Los Angeles, but across the state. "California now has 15 area codes -- more than any other state -- Another New Area Code For 310 In 1999 -- and will need to add another eight by the end of 1998 to keep pace with demand," Hescox said. Two primary factors driving that increased demand are local telephone service competition and the high-technology explosion. "With the onset of widespread competition in California's local telephone market in 1996, each new provider requires its own supply of phone numbers. In California, we have more companies entering local telephone competition than any other state. Further, the rising demand for fax machines, pagers, cellular phones, modems for Internet access and other high-tech equipment also is increasing the demand for phone numbers," he said. A telecommunications industry group representing more than 30 companies is currently developing and evaluating various options for area code relief in the 310 area code. Geographic splits have been the traditional means of providing area code relief in California. Another option, known as an overlay, may also be considered in the 310 area code provided several conditions are met, according to a December 1996 ruling by the California Public Utilities Commission. In an overlay, existing customers keep their area code and the new area code is given to people in the area who request new phone numbers. In a geographic split, the existing area code is divided with part of the area keeping the existing area code and part receiving a new area code. Under California law, public participation and comment is obtained before the industry submits a proposed area code relief plan to the California Public Utilities Commission and administrators at Bell Communications Research (Bellcore), the organization that administers the North American Numbering Plan. Hescox said a series of meetings will be held before December 1997 to seek public comment and input on potential options for the 310 area code. Locations, dates and times of the public meetings will be announced at a later time. Boundaries for the new area code, as well as the actual three-digit number, will be announced in 1998. The 310 area code serves customers in the southwestern portion of Los Angeles County. Some of the communities in this area are: San Pedro, Wilmington, Compton, Torrance, Redondo Beach, El Segundo, Santa Monica and Malibu and most of Gardena, Culver City,West Los Angeles and Beverly Hills. ------------ Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Beth Arnold Subject: Beth Arnold Revenge Spam Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 20:19:42 -0400 Hello, my name is Elisabeth Arnold. As you may or may not know, I have been the victim of a massive revenge spam. I work at a small ISP in New Jersey. Recently, I pulled a spammers account for repeated violation of our acceptable use policy. This was tw weeks ago. That weekend a message was sent out by "Beth Arnold" with a bunch of gibberish and a 200k wav file of "animal sounds". This weekend, two messages were sent. One participants in the net-abuse groups which included a 300k wav file of recordings from the activity menu of an Audix voice mail system and another to participants in the comp.* and rec.* groups. You may very well have received the message below. > Call BETH ARNOLD at 1-800-450-5766 to order a list of email addresses and > bulk email software. > If you got this message, congratulations. You are on list of email > addresses that we sell. You will receive many more messages like this > one. This message was obvious flame bait and it worked very well. I received 200 calls to my 800 number before disconnecting it. My mail server was inundated with mail bombs, returns, and complaints. My http ports were SYN attacked. And I was "ping stormed". UUNet is useless in tracking this person down. They just don't care. I would appreciate any help I can get. Thank you, Beth Arnold betharnold@cfjf.dyn.ml.org ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: In Poor Health Again Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 10:00:00 EDT I am sorry to report that once again my health has become a problem and I *may* -- stress is on 'may' -- have to go into the hospital again. I'll know in a day or so what is going on, but it appears my heart is once again getting a bit irregular. At least it feels that way to me. *If* this happens, and *if* the stay is prolonged, then for all intents and purposes the Digest will be 'off line' until whenever. Of course I might not come out of the hospital at all, and in that case I guess someone else will take this over or just end it. I've not added any new subscribers to the mailing list for a couple weeks now until I could see whether or not I was going to be in a position to send them anything much. My problem may be just 'in my head'; I do not feel at all well tonight however. Over the next day or two I will say more on the subject. For now, I just wanted everyone to have an idea where things are at. Kind regards to all, PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #144 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Jun 2 23:08:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA20714; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 23:08:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 23:08:13 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706030308.XAA20714@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #145 TELECOM Digest Mon, 2 Jun 97 23:08:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 145 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CTS Suspended and Fined (Anthony Argyriou) 1-888-PB-DAMAGE (Tad Cook) Call Forward No Answer Problem (Michael Hayworth) Legality/Ethics of Using a Found Prepaid Phone Card (John E. Connerat) Radio Waves and Cancer (Eric Florack) Netizens Netbook Finally in a Print Edition (-: (Michael Hauben) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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 Jun 1997 18:08:11 -0700 From: Anthony Argyriou Subject: CTS Suspended and Fined Pat - Attached is the text of a news release from the California PUC announcing the suspension and fining of CTS for slamming. When they are allowed back in three years, they will _not_ be allowed to request changes from local telco providers, but will have to instruct their customers to contact the local carrier directly. I have had my own bad experience with these slime. I was staying in a motel in the LA area, which had CTS as the long distance service for its room phones. The rates were approximately 2x AT&T's basic, no-discount, rates. I was told that this type of service is common, since CTS (and others) will provide a phone system, and sometimes a share of the take, to the motel owners. The phone system would not complete 10xxx-0 dialling for credit card calls most of the time I tried to make LD calls using AT&T. Anthony Argyriou California Public Utilities Commission NEWS RELEASE Contact: Kyle DeVine 213-897-4225 May 21, 1997 I96-02-043 CPUC 533 CPUC SUSPENDS AND FINES CTS; ORDERS REFUND AND PENALTY TO BE PAID TO STATE The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today cracked down on Communications Telesystem International (CTS) for slamming: In-state long distance toll call service is suspended for three years, CTS is fined $2 million, CTS must pay $1.9 million in equal payments to the more than 56,000 consumers who filed disputes claiming CTS slammed them, and The company must reimburse the Commission $100,000 to cover costs to prosecute the case and manage mailing the refunds to customers. CTS may resume business after its suspension is over, but will not be permitted to directly contact local service carriers, on behalf of its consumers, and switch the consumers' long distance companies. The Commission revoked this privilege because of CTS' failure to comply with statutory procedures and the high number of consumer disputes stating CTS had initiated changes without their consent. The amount of disputes exceeds the industry average by more than 309 percent. The Commission determined that CTS could be fined $19.6 million because of its "Stay With Us" program which trapped customers by automatically switching them back to CTS after the customers chose other carriers. All but $2 million of the fine -- which shall be paid to the State General Fund -- will be stayed if CTS stops violating state laws or Commission directives. The Commission has authority to fine utilities between $500 and $20,000 for each offense. CTS indicated 70 percent, or 39,200, of the disputes were caused by the program. Therefore, the $19.6 million fine covers $500 for each of the 39,200 disputes. CTS will notify its current in-state customers that it is not permitted to provide service in California and will reimburse all fees customers must pay to transfer from CTS to another carrier. The CPUC, in rallying to its mandate to protect consumers, has taken further steps to see that the utility's abuses stop. The actions the Commission has taken against this company apply to any successor entities, and any requests to operate submitted by a company which employs current or former CTS officers or shareholders shall be carefully scrutinized. The Commission is taking this action because its investigation discovered more than 56,000 consumers had filed disputes with Pacific Bell and GTE California claiming they had been slammed -- switched without their authorization -- by CTS from 1994 to March 1996. CTS did not respond to consumers' calls and letters, and consumers were further frustrated by CTS' "Stay With Us" program. Previous actions the Commission has taken against this company include prohibiting CTS from submitting orders to local service providers to change customers' long distance services while the investigation was ongoing. Then in July 1996, the Commission censured CTS when its staff disrupted a press conference which the Greenlining Institute, a consumer advocacy group, held to announce their involvement in the CPUC proceeding and seek witnesses. ------------------------------ Subject: 1-888-PB-DAMAGE Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 17:53:00 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) 1-888-PB-DAMAGE Offers Pacific Bell Customers Quick Information on Major Outages; Toll-free number providestimely, area-specific news regarding status, estimated restoration time for interrupted service --------------- SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 2, 1997--When a wide-spread phone service outage occurs, the last thing you want to be doing is ticking off minute after minute waiting on a wireless or coin phone to talk to someone about why your home phone doesn't work. Starting today, Pacific Bell customers can simply dial toll free 1-888-PB-DAMAGE to find out the cause and estimated restoration time of a problem affecting 200 or more customers, such as those resulting from last January's floods. When calling the nationwide toll-free number, callers are prompted to enter the area code and prefix of the affected line. The service then provides a 60-second status report on any outage in that area. The new service restoration information system can accommodate more than 12,000 calls per minute, avoiding the need for customers to dial 611 and wait on hold for a trouble-report technician if their trouble is part of a larger problem. 1-888-PB-DAMAGE provides customers -- as well as their out-of-state friends and family -- timely information about telephone outages by offering updates every two to three hours until the network is up and running, again. Customers who dial the toll-free number, but determine their phone trouble is unrelated to any other problem, can simply press one button to speak directly with a Pacific Bell 611 technician. `In the past, during major service interruptions, our customers had no other way to find out about what's wrong with their phone service during a widespread outage than to call 611,` said Fred Pifer, regional manager for Pacific Bell's service operations group. `This meant our repair centers were deluged with calls and customers were inconvenienced by a potentially lengthy hold. With 888-PB-DAMAGE, customers can receive a current update on the status of their service, while still having the option of talking to a repair center employee if they want.` In addition, customers who initially dial 611 will receive a prompt offering them the opportunity to access the outage information service without redialing. Pacific Bell is a subsidiary of SBC Communications Inc., an international leader in the telecommunications industry, with more than 31 million access lines and 4.7 million wireless customers across the United States, as well as investments in telecommunications businesses in nine countries. Under the Southwestern Bell, Pacific Bell, Nevada Bell and Cellular One brands, the company, through its subsidiaries, offers a wide range of innovative services, including local and long-distance telephone service, wireless communications, paging, Internet access, cable TV and messaging, as well as telecommunications equipment, and directory advertising and publishing. SBC (www.sbc.com) has approximately 110,000 employees. SBC and Pacific Telesis Group reported combined 1996 revenues of $23.5 billion. ------------------------------ From: Michael Hayworth Subject: Call Forward No Answer Problem Date: 2 Jun 1997 23:04:16 GMT Organization: Innovative TeleSolutions We are having an odd problem and ending up with a great deal of finger-pointing and very little help on the part of SWBT. Perhaps someone can help me figure out what magic phrase I need to use to turn on the light for either their repair or order department. We have a local POTS line from SWBT which has call forward busy and call forward no answer on it. The line forwards to an 800 line which is on one of my WorldCom T-1s. We get most calls in just fine and they forward okay. However, if we get a call that forwards, then another one soon behind it (while the first is still connected, it appears), the local line will simply ring endlessly without forwarding. Bell, of course, can't find a problem, so they're claiming that the problem has to be in my 800 lines.But we know that we can stack multiple calls onto the 800 line just fine. The only time we have the problem is with the forwarding from the CO line. I am familiar with having to order multiple voice paths on an RCF number, but my understanding was that on a local line with call forward, this isn't something I have to do. One repair tech at Bell told me that I DID need to order another voice path, and sent me to business services, but two different customer service reps there said they didn't know anything about ordering extra paths on a line with call forward, that what I want to do should work fine and (all together now) the problem has to be with WorldCom. Or, maybe, the problem is with SWBT, in which case I need to talk to the repair department, even though they just sent me over. But, then, I'm sure I don't need to elaborate on this cycle with the residents of these groups. Any input on this would be greatly appreciated. What are the real technical facts? What do I actually need? If I know that, I can bang on doors there until I can find someone who knows what they're talking about. Thanks, Michael Hayworth VP, Technology Innovative TeleSolutions Fort Worth, Texas ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 18:29:04 -0500 From: John E. Connerat Subject: Legality/Ethics of Using a Found Prepaid Phone Card If I found a $5 bill on a city street, and I couldn't reasonably determine to whom it belonged, I think I would be within my legal rights to claim it as mine and use it in a way that I see fit. Readers, how does the above logic apply to a found prepaid phone card? Indeed, I found one on a bench at a nearby bus stop, and there was no one in sight. Out of curiosity, I called the 800 number, punched in the code, and found that there was a balance left on the card. Based on where I found it and based on the fact that the no one had cancelled the balance, I assumed it was lost -- not stolen -- and that it would never be claimed by its rightful owner. I hestiated using it, however, since my use would clearly be logged. Do people report stolen prepaid cards? Can a rightful consumer cancel his/her remaining balance and be re-issued a new PIN if they wrote down their old PIN? Would I be, in effect, stealing long distance since I didn't purchase the card? What would the specific illegal act be if I decided to use it? Does anyone have any ethical opinions or legal facts that they can enlighten us with? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The nice thing about five dollar bills -- or twenties or fifties for that matter -- is that they are totally anonymous, and mine look just like yours. No PINs are needed to obtain them or use them. No names are given. A phone card is essentially cash; it is rare that the purchaser gave a name or any other form of identity when purchasing it. Without the card in their possession it is unlikely they know the PIN and consequently very unlikely they could issue a stop order on it. I suspect in the very unlikely event they did manage to get it replaced, the old PIN would go dead, rendering all this a moot point. You might try calling the number on the card given for customer service and asking them what would happen if you lost 'your' card; if there is any method of stopping useage on it and re-issuing it, etc. Whatever answer they give you is the same answer they would likely give the unfortunate person who lost the card if s/he were to call and make the same inquiry. You can go from there in detirmining if it is 'safe' to use the card or not. Aside from the prudence in using the card (to be detirmined by you when you find out how traceable or back-trackable it is) I suggest the legality and ethics of using it would be the same for using the five dollar bill you found on the sidewalk. If there is any reason- able way of detirmining the rightful owner, you probably should do so. Many newspapers have 'lost and found' sections in their classified advertisements with the 'found' ads usually run free of charge as a public service. You might try one of those, along with perhaps a small notice posted at the place where you found the card. Leave out such essentials as the brand of card and the denomination, forcing the would-be loser to supply that information correctly, otherwise you will have plenty of claimants. Put the card aside and do not use it for awhile in the hopes the owner will claim it as a result of your efforts. Legally you might be guilty of the crime of Unjust Enrichment if you do not make some effort to locate the true owner. Of course you could also forward the card in the mail to the company which issued it and tell them you found it and ask them to locate the rightful owner from their records, if any records exist. That may be a rather naive response on your part (to return the card to the company) but you will probably feel better afterward. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:15:06 PDT From: Eric Florack Subject: Radio Waves and Cancer With regards to EMF and cancer, specifically Ham Radio, but in a broader sense, Cell Phones, too, I found the following On Peter Neuman's archives from 1988. These notes would seem to bear directly on this discussion: ------------- barry ornitz < ucbcad!ames.UUCP!rochester!kodak!ornitz@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU > Wed, 6 Jan 88 23:07:43 EST [The following is an article I posted on the subject of Cancer and Electromagnetic Radiation. I have received several replies on my posting; two disputed Dr. Milham's statistics based on Poisson distributions, and one mailed an article on Milham's previous article in 1985 in Lancet. Barry] In yesterday's newspaper, I noticed with great interest an article entitled "Link suggested between cancer, electromagnetic fields." The article had the byline of the Associated Press, Tacoma, WA. It was stated in the article that "amateur radio operators in two states appear to die at abnormally high rates from several forms of cancer, suggesting a possible link between cancer and electromagnetic fields, according to data collected by a state epidemiologist." This article appears to be prompted by work published in the American Journal of Epidemiology by Dr. Samuel Milham Jr. of the Washington Department of Social and Health Services. According to the article, Dr. Milham studied the deaths of 2,485 Washington and California amateur (ham) radio operators between 1979 and 1984. Based on a population this size, he found the following data: Expected Actual Cause Deaths Deaths ------------------------ ----------------------- ----------- Leukemia 29 36 Lymphatic & Blood Forming Organ Cancers 72 89 Prostate Cancer 67.6 (!) 78 I am not sure about the statistical differences between these numbers, but I am certain that a trained epidemiologist would check the statistical significance of his data before publishing. Dr. Milham is further reported to have concluded that "amateur radio operator licensees in Washington state and California have significant excess mortality due to acute myloid leukemia, multiple myeloma and perhaps certain types of malignant lymphoma." The Associated Press article also quoted Leonard Sagan, program manager for radiation studies at the Electric Power Research Institute in Palo Alto, CA. Sagan warned that studies like Dr. Milham's could be misinterpreted, and that the "findings could be simple associations that have nothing to do with cancer causes among people who work with electricity." Having been an amateur radio operator for over twenty-three years, and having been concerned with the safety of exposure to non-ionizing, radio frequency electromagnetic energy as a small portion of my job, I have a few comments about this article. Before I begin, I should state that my title of Dr. is not a medical one, but rather a PhD in Engineering. I should also state that I have not yet read the article in the American Journal of Epidemiology. The medical effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation have been shown to be frequency dependent. This is logical since as the wavelength of radiation approaches the dimensions of the human body, absorption of the radiation is enhanced due to more efficient coupling into the body. At higher frequencies (shorter wavelengths), typically in the microwave region, the electromagnetic radiation is absorbed near the surface of the body. The ANSI standards for exposure to radio frequency energy take this information into account, placing the most strict requirements on frequencies in the VHF (very high frequency) region. Amateur use of the VHF spectrum, while dating back over fifty years, has primarily been negligible until twenty years ago. Amateur transmitter power levels in the VHF region have generally been much lower than the power levels used in the high frequency bands. Antenna placement for VHF, in terms of wavelengths from the amateur's operating position, is generally high. These three facts would tend to cancel the increased hazard of VHF radiation. To test Milham's hypothesis further, a study of FM broadcast engineers, commercial two-way radio technicians, and television transmitter engineers should be performed since these persons are all exposed to various levels of VHF radiation. The highest field strengths to which amateur radio operators are normally exposed come from the near field antenna radiation during high frequency operation. Power levels of up to two kilowatts may be used with antenna placement often below a wavelength. It should be noted that exposure to this power level is intermittent in most amateur operation. If Milham's hypothesis is correct, broadcast technicians and engineers for commercial AM and especially short wave broadcast stations, as well as military communication operators should show even higher levels of cancer deaths than hams. Operation on microwave frequencies by amateur radio operators is rare; furthermore, I would expect any cancers caused by microwaves to be other than deep tissue cancers. A study of the eyes for cataracts would be in order, too, since microwave exposure generally causes eye problems prior to additional damage in the human body. I believe that other causality should be investigated by the medical profession before Dr. Milham's conclusions are accepted. I would expect that the amateurs studied by Dr. Milham were mostly individuals who had been hams for many years. An analysis including the length of time that the amateurs were licensed (or at least active) would be in order. I believe that this analysis would show some increased mortality (adjusted for age, of course) for the older hams. If this increased mortality exists, I feel that other environmental factors should be studied in addition to exposure to electromagnetic fields. Until twenty-five to thirty years ago, much of the amateur radio equipment in use was home constructed. The construction of electronic equipment at this and especially prior years, exposed the amateur to a number of chemical hazards, many of which were not known as hazards at the time. For example, I would expect to see higher than normal levels of metals in older hams such as tin, lead, bismuth, antimony, and cadmium (from soldering); mercury (from broken rectifier tubes and relays); barium, beryllium, and rare earth oxides (from broken vacuum tubes and phosphors from cathode ray tubes); radium (from luminescent dials); selenium (from rectifiers); and manganese and zinc (from batteries). Likewise these hams would have been exposed to rosin fumes containing numerous organic acids (from soldering), paint solvents and cleaning fluids such as benzene and carbon tetrachloride, phenol (from burnt phenolic insulators), and asbestos. Even more insidious, however, was the exposure to transformer and capacitor impregnating oils. These oils often contained poly-chlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) as flame retardants, sometimes in quite high concentrations. These chemical hazards were not unique to amateur radio operators only. Other electronic hobbyists as well as people manufacturing electronic equipment would have been exposed to similar hazards. I feel that it would be prudent to compare mortality rates of workers in oil-filled capacitor manufacturing plants to those of the hams studied [for example, the Sangamo capacitor plant in Pickens, SC, which until several years ago was a major user of PCB oils]. In conclusion, I believe that other causal relationships between cancer deaths and amateur radio operators may more adequately explain Milham's data. I propose that Milham or other epidemiologists expand their study to include the other occupations I have suggested above. I further propose that age-adjusted mortality rates be calculated for the existing data to determine whether length of exposure or date of exposure is significant and whether chemical exposure of these hams might be significant. I am certain that electromagnetic radiation has effects on the human body, but I do believe that electromagnetic radiation is not the major cause of the increase in cancer deaths as stated by Dr.Milham. For those persons interested in further study on the effects of electromagnetic radiation, I would suggest the American National Standards Institute document ANSI C95.1-1982, Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 300 kHz to 100 GHz. This standard contains an appendix listing numerous references on the biological effects of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields. A number of other standards exist for radio-frequency and microwave exposure; many of these are listed in the Microwave Engineer's Handbook, Vol. 2. If anyone has read Dr. Milham's original article, I would appreciate their sending me the exact title and the date of publication so I might have our library order a copy. I would also appreciate the comments of other amateurs as well as physicians on this subject. Please email responses directly to me and I will summarize or cross-post your replies to both rec.ham-radio and sci.med (many hams on ARPA receive their postings via an automatic mailing list rather than a newsgroup). Thanks and 73 [ham radio jargon for best regards]. Barry L. Ornitz WA4VZQ Dr. Barry L. Ornitz UUCP:...!rochester!kodak!ornitz Eastman Kodak Company, Eastman Chemicals Division Research Laboratories P. O. Box 1972, Kingsport, TN 37662 615/229-4904 -------------------- Risks of Amateur Radio Martin Ewing < msesys@DEImos.Caltech.Edu > Wed, 6 Jan 88 17:37:01 PST I also noted Dr Milham's study of ham radio operators vs cancer statistics. The press report was undoutably mangled, but as a sometime radio amateur, I can add some questions and comments. Was there any analysis of the actual RF exposure to the amateurs? Typical amateur radio operations involves <<50% of time spent in actual transmission. Typical frequencies range from 3.5 to 220 MHz, and power levels from 5 W to 1 kW. Emission modes vary, but single-sideband voice is most common up to 30 MHz; SSB duty cycles are <<100% even when transmitting. Antennas range from large yagi arrays on high towers to loaded 1/4 wave "rubber duckies" held next to the head while using VHF handheld equipment. Many licensees are inactive, too. Was there any demographic control? Ham operators have a peculiar distribution, with "peaks" among young-adult techies and retired middle-class WASP males. Hams expose themselves to various other potential hazards: solvents and smoke during soldering, PCBs from transformer and capacitor oils, etc. Why should one suspect RF exposure in particular? Apparently the study came out in a reputable journal, so it may deserve a better review than the AP (and we) are giving it. Martin Ewing, Caltech ----------------------- Re: Ham radios and non-ionizing radiation Douglas Jones < jones%cs.uiowa.edu@RELAY.CS.NET > Wed, 6 Jan 88 11:16:58 CST Eric Townsend's note raises the possibility of a > link between cancer and electromagnetic fields > in the context of a study of cancer cases among ham radio operators. I would not be surprised to find a link between ham radio operation and cancer for a completely unrelated reason: Ham radio operators tend to work with electronics, exposing them to many interesting chemicals in the process, including lead vapor from hot solder and vaporized solder flux, not to mention coil dope, red glypt, and other oddities. Older ham radio equipment frequently contained large oil-filed capacitors (possibly containing PCB oils), and who can forget the ozone smell caused by the high plate voltages used by pre-1970 transmitters. I don't mean to imply that there is no risk associated with the high fields around a radio transmitter, after all, you can cook hot-dogs by putting them inside the antenna impedence matching coils, but there are other possible causes of the small increase in cancer risk that was observed. A good experiment to test these risks would be to look at the cancer rate among model railroaders. They also solder things and work with related chemicals, but the electric fields they are exposed to are produced by a source with a maximum power of 12 watts (12 volts at one amp, DC power to the track). Douglas Jones ------------------------------ From: hauben@inibara.cc.columbia.edu (Michael Hauben) Subject: Netizens Netbook Finally in a Print Edition (-: Date: 2 Jun 1997 15:42:41 GMT Organization: Columbia University Reply-To: hauben@columbia.edu The Netizens netbook is now in print! After three long years, it is nice to see at last a print edition. It is a tribute to the Net and the contributions and support of many of you that it has finally appeared in an "old-world" book. The print publication is especially important because it makes available an understanding of the communication and community aspects of the Net to people not yet online, and to those who are only familiar with the media hype about the Net. The draft remains online at http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ which we will try and update when we get the chance to be the latest version. The book's full title is "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet" and the authors are Michael Hauben and Ronda Hauben. The ISBN number is 0-8186-7706-6. The publisher is the IEEE Computer Society Press. If you do not see it in your local bookstore, you can ask them to get copies in by giving them the above information. We welcome people interested in reviewing the book or other comments. Write Ronda at rh120@columbia.edu or ronda@umcc.umich.edu Thanks for the help and support! /Michael hauben@columbia.edu The table of contents is as follows: Foreword: By Tom Truscott Preface: What is a Netizen? Introduction: Participatory Networks Part I - The Present: What Has Been Created and How? Chapter 1 - The Net and the Netizens: The Effect the Net has on People's Lives Chapter 2 - The Evolution of Usenet: The Poor Man's Arpanet Chapter 3 - The Social Forces Behind The Development of Usenet Chapter 4 - The World of Usenet Part II - The Past: Where Has It All Come From? Chapter 5 - The Vision of Interactive Computing and the Future Chapter 6 - Cybernetics, Time-sharing, Human-Computer Symbiosis and On-line Communities: Creating a Supercommunity of Online Communities Chapter 7 - Behind the Net: The Untold Story of the ARPANET and Computer Science Chapter 8 - The Birth and Development of the ARPANET Chapter 9 - On the Early History and Impact of UNIX: Tools to Build the Tools for a New Millennium Chapter 10 - On the Early Days of Usenet: The Roots of the Cooperative Online Culture Part III - And the Future? Chapter 11 - The NTIA Conference on the Future of the Net Creating a Prototype for a Democratic Decision Making Process Chapter 12 - "Imminent Death of the Net Predicted!" Chapter 13 - The Effect of the Net on the Professional News Media: The Usenet News Collective and Man-Computer News Symbiosis Chapter 14 - The Net and the Future of Politics: The Ascendancy of the Commons Chapter 15 - Exploring New York City's On-Line Community: A Snapshot of NYC.General Part IV - Contributions Towards Developing a Theoretical Framework Chapter 16 - The Expanding Commonwealth of Learning: Printing and the Net Chapter 17 - `Arte': An Economic Perspective Chapter 18 - The Computer as Democratizer Bibliography Glossary of Acronyms Appendix Proposed draft Declaration of the Rights of Netizens ----------------------------------------- Michael Hauben Teachers College Dept. of Communication Netizens Netbook http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ WWW Music Index http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/music/ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #145 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 3 00:30:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA25892; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 00:30:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 00:30:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706030430.AAA25892@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #146 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Jun 97 00:30:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 146 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Ten-Digit Dialing in Houston (Tad Cook) Looking For V.35 Sync Hardware and Software (Vernon Harvey) ESS Computer Architecture? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (John R. Levine) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Bill Sohl) Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers (Bill Turner) Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List (James Bellaire) Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List (John R. Levine) Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List (Andrew Crawford) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Ten-Digit Dialing in Houston Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 16:13:55 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) In Houston, 7-Digit Dialing's Days Numbered BY DWIGHT SILVERMAN, HOUSTON CHRONICLE Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Jun. 1--Ready or not, here comes 281. Beginning at 12:01 a.m. Saturday, making a call between the 713 and 281 area codes will require dialing all 10 digits -- the area code and the phone number. Since November, Southwestern Bell's phone system has been extremely forgiving -- callers have had the choice of dialing seven or 10 digits when calling between the new 281 and the old 713 area codes. But if you try that after Saturday, in most cases you'll get a recording saying you've reached a number that's not working, and you'll be told to redial with the correct area code. Most calls between 713 and 281 will not incur long-distance charges, unless the numbers were toll calls before the switchover. It's the final step in a long process that began three years ago and took a sudden left turn when state regulators told Southwestern Bell they didn't like the way it was implementing area codes in Houston and Dallas. And it's only the beginning. At least two more area codes will be launched in Houston before the century ends. "This is not going to make people happy," said Texas Public Utility Commission spokeswoman Leslie Kjellstrand. "But not having phone numbers is not going to make people happy, either." Roughly half the area's residents and businesses have had to change their area code to 281, forcing them to alter stationery, forms, signage, advertising and business cards. They've also had to reprogram phone switchboards, fax machines, autodialers and computer modems. "We're ready," said Bill Jackson, owner of Palace Doors and Glass, a small business near Tomball. "We have already changed all our signs, business cards and stationery -- the whole bit. We took care of it just as soon as we knew it was going to happen." That area-code vigilance came at a price, though -- about $400 to $500. "I see a lot of people with their truck signs that still say 713," said Jackson. "They still haven't changed them. They are not on the ball like we are." On the opposite side of the 281 area code last week, Ken LeBlanc was reprogramming the speed-dialing equipment at Clear Lake Flowers and Gifts. "We've been aware of it for some time, because we transmit orders to other cities," LeBlanc said. "This is going on all over the country. It is the wave of the future." Although the situation is complex, the problem is simple -- the 713 area code has run out of phone numbers. Growth in the Houston region, combined with a demand for second home phone lines, extra business lines, pagers, fax machines and computer modems, has been gobbling available numbers at an increasing rate. The demand for phone numbers is going to get worse when competitors enter the local phone market, said Kjellstrand, and new phone services are made available. The situation in Houston is not unique -- more than 70 new area codes are being added around the country this year alone. New codes were recently implemented in North Texas, around the Fort Worth area and in the Texas Hill Country. In California alone this year, five new area codes will be created. Another five are scheduled to take effect next year. The 281 area, which has been formally in place since November, covers the outer part of a loop very roughly defined by the Sam Houston Tollway -- 281 dips below parts of the tollway to the north, while 713 extends beyond the tollway in some western parts of town. The addition of 281 is only a temporary fix. Both 713 and 281 will run out of numbers by early 1999, and the Texas Public Utility Commission is considering plans that could add two or more area codes to Houston by mid-1998. Kjellstrand said everything is on the table in those discussions, including one or more overlay plans, the original design for 281 rejected by the commission last year. In an overlay, two or more area codes exist side by side, without regard to geography. The benefit to overlays, say phone system experts, is that they last longer. On the other hand, in an overlay system all phone numbers are dialed as 10 digits. When Southwestern Bell was arguing for an overlay for 281 and the 972 area code in Dallas, company officials pitched it as less confusing for callers. They said no one would have to change phone numbers, and those making phone calls would not have to figure out whether to dial the area code for a specific number -- all calls would require an area code. But the commission disagreed. It cited 10-digit dialing, along with other factors, in ordering Bell in May 1996 use a more traditional geographic split of existing area codes. Kjellstrand said developments in phone technology have since made an overlay less onerous. For example, it's now easier for phone customers to take their numbers with them -- a process called number portability -- if they change local phone service providers (which customers will be able to do in the near future). But that still would not prevent neighbors, or even two phone lines in the same house, from having different area codes. Southwestern Bell ran out of 713 numbers in spring 1996 and began issuing 281 numbers both to its customers and to other phone service providers. As a result, there are duplicate numbers in the 713 and 281 area codes and there are 281 numbers sitting in the geographic area of 713. Those numbers will be switched over to 713 by the end of the year, Bell spokesman Chris Talley said. Under permissive dialing, which has been in effect since last fall, anyone who places a call in Houston using just seven digits automatically gets the 713 number. That works fine, unless you're among the tens of thousands of people with duplicate numbers. If you are and you have a 281 number, then callers have had to dial the area code to reach you. In effect, the people with those 281 duplicates have been using their phones for months the way most Houstonians will starting Saturday. Holly Polgue, an assignments editor for the TV news operation at Channel 26, is one of them. She was given a 281 number when she moved into a home in Alief about a month ago. She must dial 713 before all numbers in that area code if she wants her calls to go through. "It's not really difficult, but I've been there about a month, and I still have to think about it every time I use the phone," Polgue said. "It's a little wacky." Polgue said she's had the most problems with people who call her from out of town and don't realize that she has a 281 number. The 713 duplicate of her phone number isn't assigned, so callers get a recording saying the number isn't in service. The permissive dialing period was designed to get people used to the idea of dialing the new area code and to encourage people to start using the area code when calling between 713 and 281. But despite the fact that every phone call in the Bell system is logged, company officials can't say how many calls are being made now with the area code dialed first. Talley said those numbers can't be extracted in a meaningful way from the company's computers. "We'd like to get those numbers, too," he said. On Saturday, if too many callers try to dial between 713 and 281 without first dialing the area code, it's possible the phone system could suffer problems, said Ed Frisa, Southwestern Bell's area manager for network maintenance. In a worst-case scenario, Frisa said, "it could have a severe effect on the dialing ability of our customers." That would include lots of busy-circuits messages as recordings advising callers to dial the area code are swamped, he said. It may not take that much for an overload to occur. In Dallas, which just went to mandatory area-code dialing in April, as few as six incorrectly dialed calls into some phone company switches caused problems, said Bell spokesman Bill Palen. But, Palen said, the cutover was "so smooth, it was a non-event." Part of the reason was because of the way permissive dialing was set up in Dallas. In Dallas, callers who dialed a number using only seven digits during permissive dialing defaulted to the 214 area code. If a number was duplicated in both 214 and 972, the call was routed to the number in the caller's area code. If the duplicate number wasn't assigned, the caller got a recording saying to try the other area code. In Houston, all seven-digit calls default to the 713 area code. "People in Dallas were used to the recordings, so it went very well," Palen said. "There was some congestion in the phone network the weekend it began. By the following Wednesday, calling levels were back to normal." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So the weekend has come and gone. How did the cutover work out? Were there the massive problems with the system the author implies may have occurred if large numbers of people misdialed? PAT] ------------------------------ From: vharvey@rydex.com (Vernon Harvey) Subject: Looking For V.35 Sync Hardware and Software Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 14:42:39 -0800 Organization: KTK Communications Ltd. (SmarttNet, http://www.smartt.com) Reply-To: vharvey@rydex.com I was wondering if anyone can recommend synchronous hardware and software for the OS/2 Warp, Windows 3.x and Windows NT 4.0 environments. I am looking for a single port card. Basically, our company provides ship/shore communications solutions for e-mail, and the new NERA satellite terminals have a high speed data channel which uses V.35 synchronous communications. The ships are usually running Windows 3.1 and Windows 95. On the shore side, we currently come into either an OS/2 Warp or a Windows NT system which is running our mail server. Multi-port cards for the OS/2 and NT side may be necessary in some cases, but on the ship side, we only need a single port card. Needless to say, API toolkits and drivers are required for all these platforms. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Please post or e-mail responses to vharvey@rydex.com Regards, Vernon Harvey Rydex Industries Corporation. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: ESS Computer Architecture? Date: 3 Jun 1997 02:37:41 GMT Organization: Net Access BBS I'm a business application computer programmer (COBOL, BASIC, etc.) and I always wondered what it was like to program Electronic Switching Systems. I've seen articles describing the logical organization of different ESS components, but nothing describing the programming language itself that they use. Could anyone answer the following questions? 1) What does the basic instruction set of an ESS look like? (This would be equivalent to the Assembler language for the machine -- the most basic programmable instructions.) I would assume they have the usual LOAD, STORE, ADD computer instructions, but do they have specialized instructions for call handling? That is, somehow the switch has to be programmed to send out ringing current to the called party, and a ringing signal to the calling party. Is this instruction set unique to an ESS, or is it similar to other computers? 2) When they program an ESS, do they use the basic assembler language, or do they have higher level languages to make it easier? If so, what are the higher level languages like? 3) I assume the basic call handling is programmed by the switch manufacturer. Settings for the application for the local exchange are placed in by the phone company -- I assume the phone company does NOT have to program the machine in native language. Is this correct? 4) Do the various kinds of switches (ie AT&T current models, older Western Electric models, Automatic Electric and DSS models) all use the same or similar machine architecture, or are each proprietary? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1997 15:44:26 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Since PCS is really being rolled out as a deluxe cellular service > today, even the number of towers needed is less than 800 MHz, > analog cellular, since digital is more robust ... I was under the impression that since PCS uses much higher frequencies than AMPS, the maximum cell size is considerably smaller. In cities, that's not much of an issue, since the cells are far less than the maximum size and in cities you tend to have plenty of places to hang an antenna. Out here in the boondocks, every antenna tends to sit on a large ugly tower on top of a hill, and siting them is very contentious. (The biggest current political issue in the Town of Ulysses where I live is just this, whether to let Frontier build a large cell tower in a farmer's field. A lot of us don't see any reason they can't colocate with Cell One's tower across the lake.) The AMPS cells are very large, 10 miles or more across, but PCS can't do that so you'd need considerably more towers to provide complete coverage. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 01:06:27 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , The Old Bear > wrote: >> More than 300 communities already have revolted, imposing moratoria >> on cell tower construction, and the movement is growing. > My town newspaper has had several articles recently on the > negotiations taking place with PCS companies. If my interpretation is > correct, the law doesn't allow communities to prevent tower > construction. It varies from state to state, but generally the community can not outright ban towers as you note. > However, it does allow them to specify where the towers may be > constructed, Usually by specifyng them as allowed in commercial zoning areas. > and negotiate payment for the use of town property. If the tower is, in fact, on town property. There's nothing that forces any town to allow township property to be used for such purposes. > Although there's some NIMBY feeling, allowing towers to be > installed on places like fire stations is apparently seen as a > money-making proposition. My town has leases for antennas placed by several cellular and pager companies on township water tanks. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: Bill Turner Subject: Re: Legal Recourse Against Spammers Date: 2 Jun 1997 16:41:55 GMT Organization: Amateur Radio Station WB4ALM Reply-To: wb4alm@gte.net John Diamant wrote: > Protecting people from spamming is nowhere to be found in federal > powers. If you make some vague argument about interstate commerce, > let me point out that it would have no validity to spam sent > entirely within a single state. Even if the ISP was in another state? Drawing a "verrry thin line", it occurs to me that the "no validity" would apply only if no portion of the message crossed a state border. I would think that Internet, by definition, has to be "Interstate Commerce". Now that might not be true for an INTRANET, but if you are receiving SPAM on an INTRANET, you probably have other, much bigger, problems. But I would like to get rid of the commercial spammers and the non-profit fund raisers, and the religous messages, and ... Damn, that is a big list isn't it? Which of course, is why it is so hard to define ... I was going to say that the way I define SPAM is getting something I didn't ask for, but that would then prevent "unknown others" from emailing me with requests for Technical help -- which I generally don't mind receiving. Back to the drawing board. /s/ Bill Turner, wb4alm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 06:48:53 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List ... Henry mensch suggested: > Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List ... > ... and you make it available freely on the web ... then having $60 > won't be the gating factor to send anyone on that list junk mail > anymore. In turn, this could open the floodgates to those folks > listed on that list. How about incorporating the list in a server side application, say a web page or 'finger' port, that allowed a user to type in an address and have a result message displayed reflecting the results. ie: "The address you entered is not part of the 'Non-AOL' address list" or "The address you entered is part of the 'Non-AOL' address list, for class action suit information, visit " The user would need to be able to trust the application's maintainer, lest it become a way to add your name to yet another spam list. And whoever ends up with the list would need trusted status with their service provider to set up any kind of server side application. I suppose the seller of the list could just mark it "(c)1997, display or retransmission of this list prohibited." Then they could take the poster to court if they used it other to send email. Now that would be an interesting case. A spammer as plaintiff. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Telecom Indiana Webpage http://www.iquest.net/~bellaire/telecom/ ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1997 15:46:41 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List ... Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > ... and you make it available freely on the web ... then having $60 > won't be the gating factor to send anyone on that list junk mail > anymore. In turn, this could open the floodgates to those folks > listed on that list. Good point. I'd suggest computing the MD5 checksum of each name and putting the list of checksums on the web. If you want to check a particular name, you compute its MD5 checksum using any of several freely available programs and see if that checksum is in the list. This lets people see if they're on the spam list without revealing the contents of the list to anyone. If the IEMMC were honest and competent, they'd do something similar. Sadly, I see little evidence of either. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 21:28:52 GMT From: Andrew Crawford Subject: Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List ... > ... and you make it available freely on the web ... then having $60 > won't be the gating factor to send anyone on that list junk mail > anymore. In turn, this could open the floodgates to those folks > listed on that list. That's true - but what if someone - someone in the UK, say - was to send "remove me" emails "from" each of those addresses? I speak hypothetically of course. Also hypothetically, someone might also send several thousand "add me" emails with bogus "from" addresses. It would be quite easily done in a few lines of PERL ... I could never condone that, of course, but if the list turns out to contain "treb@euitew.com" you'll maybe have some idea why. There's a lot to be said for fighting fire with fire. I don't think any spammer could seriously complain about receiving unsolicited emails with fake "from" addresses ... Andrew [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think spammers have much to complain about at all. Some would say, 'you do not fight fire with fire, you fight fire with a fire extinquisher ...' and that is a very good theoretical solution, but it seems to me things have gotten so bad there is very little time left for the net as a respectable and decent medium for the public anyway, so it might just as well all go out in a blaze of glory with email logjams and network con- gestion the likes of which has never been seen before. Just bring it all to a screaming halt so no traffic can get anywhere. To do that, you would start by wreaking havoc on their mailers. I suggest you sic their autoresponders on each other. Compile some massive, hellish, humongous spam files for mailing. Carefully 'adjust' the header so that it is 'From ' and 'From:' with a Message-ID appropriate to the sender. Next set the 'To: ' line to . If you want to add a few 'bcc: still.more.autoresponders@different.places' go right ahead. Better to make them bcc instead of cc so they won't ever know for sure what is coming or going. Now with your missive prepared, dump it in the stream. Naturally you won't want to use conventional email programs; far better to get everything prepared and then telnet to their sendmail socket. That will help prevent a lot of information from getting into the header that you don't want them to see. Telnet over to whatever socket it is, get their HELO and hand them a load of crap sure to generate a few thousand responses in each direction by the time they wake up in the morning, notice the mess and start killing off processes, etc. It would be a good idea to coordinate this so that a couple dozen of their autoresponders were all involved, answering each other from all directions all night long. The other day I suggested starting a mailing list of spammers, and simply remailing all spam received to every name on the list. The trouble with this, as Bill Pfieffer pointed out to me is that so many of the addresses they provide are bogus that within a short time your own mailer would be overloaded handling mail daemons. Better to leave yourself out of the loop ... I suppose you could write a script however that would take incoming spam and route it back out using the techniques I mentioned above, randomly selecting two or more autoresponders each time around. God only knows where it would all end. Be sure and include a line or two saying that the autoresponders can take themselves off of future mailings any time they want by putting the word 'remove' in the subject line. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #146 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 3 01:41:14 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA00663; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 01:41:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 01:41:14 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706030541.BAA00663@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #147 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Jun 97 01:41:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 147 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail (Monty Solomon) Re: Bandwidth is a Replacement For Switching. Shannon? (John Eichler) Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam (Alan Boritz) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Rich Osman) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (William H. Bowen) Re: New 911 System Press Release (Tye McQueen) Re: New 911 System Press Release (Thomas P. Brisco) Re: Emergency Call Services (Chris Moffett) Re: Stopping the Splits (William H. Bowen) Re: Stopping the Splits (Robert McMillin) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Craig Macbride) I am Really Very Concerned (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 2 Jun 1997 23:45:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:08:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Agre Subject: Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail [I like the part about sending samples of spam to your members of Congress. We've almost been numbed by the vileness of the stuff, but people who aren't online will surely be impressed by the idea of a daily bombardment of it.] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 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 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 11:21:32 -0400 (EDT) From: "John C. Mozena" Subject: CAUCE News **EXTRA** CAUCE News **EXTRA** for Monday, June 2 From the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail: URGENT! WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVES *NOW* With two "spam" bills competing in Congress, and at least one more possibly on the way, Members of Congress are starting to decide which bill to support and which to oppose. It is *CRITICAL* that every CAUCE supporter let their Senators and Representative know that UCE *is* a big deal to their constituents. We urgently need every CAUCE member to write their Senators and Representative, asking them to SUPPORT H.R. 1748, the bill from Rep. Christopher Smith, R-NJ, and NOT SUPPORT S. 771, the competing bill from Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-AK. This is *very* important. According to CAUCE head lobbyist Ray Everett-Church, Members of Congress are not yet convinced that UCE is something they should be spending their time on. In his lobbing, he is finding that some offices don't even know there's a problem with junk email! You have to tell them about it! OLD-FASHIONED PAPER MAIL IS VITAL! These need to be *actual* paper letters. For whatever reason, paper means a lot more on Capitol Hill than electrons. (Savetrees.com's efforts notwithstanding.) If you're not sure of who your representatives are, check the Congressional websites: House: Senate: The postal addresses for your members are: The Honorable The Honorable Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20515 The letter doesn't have to be long ... two paragraphs is as effective as 10 pages. And you don't need to write different letters, the same one can be sent to each Member. (Just remember to change the mailing address!) POINTS TO EMPHASIZE * "Junk" email lets the advertisers make a profit while recipients pay the bill. This "Cost Shifting" was the problem with junk faxes, and is just as bad with junk email. If businesses are going to make profits, they should be required to pay the costs of doing business. * Thanks to the CDA, Members of Congress are wary of anything that smells like a "ban" or "censorship". Remind them that this is *not* an issue of censorship, rather it's about stopping deceptive and damaging business practice. * Tell them that you support a system that requires an "opt-in," where individuals don't receive advertising they don't want, and don't have to fight to get themselves dislodged from mailing lists. * Tell them that you oppose "filtering" or "Opt-Out" approaches because those approaches do not require the advertisers to bear their own costs. Filtering requirements cost ISPs and consumers more money, not less! If you save spam, enclose one or two copies of some of the more offensive or obviously fraudulent spams you've received. Let them get a taste of this stuff. (However, we don't want to get them angry with us so don't flood them with 50,000 copies! One or two will be fine.) THREE LETTERS SPELL "SUCCESS" We're making major progress! News reports have been very favorable and endorsements are rolling in from consumers and businesses all over the world! We have a good bill in Rep. Smith's legislation, one in which CAUCE representatives have had a lot of input. We need to get Congress interested in H.R.1748 and we need to do it *now*. Write those three letters and mail them today! *** ABOUT THIS MESSAGE: This message was written and broadcast by the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-Mail. It is copyrighted (c) 1997 by the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-Mail. We encourage redistribution of items from this message, as long as they are not spammed anywhere, are on-topic, and include our copyright notice. When in doubt, post the URL of our site instead, or put it in your signature. Press, broadcast, and Internet media may treat this material as they would a press release. For other commercial reproduction rights, contact John Mozena (moz@cauce.org). ************************************************************************* You have received this message because your address was given as part of the sign-up process at www.cauce.org or was signed up for the CAUCE-ANNOUNCE mailing list. If you do not want to receive any further messages from this list or were subscribed without your knowledge, please send mail to cauce-announce-request@cauce.org with a subject of "unsubscribe," or contact J.D. Falk (jdfalk@cauce.org) to be removed manually. We exist to eradicate unsolicited e-mail, and, unlike spammers, will honor "remove" requests. ************************************************************************* If you have other questions or comments about this message, contact John Mozena (moz@cauce.org). ------------------------------ From: John Eichler Subject: Re: Bandwidth is a Replacement For Switching. Shannon? Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 08:31:06 -0500 Pat, Dave Penkler said: > I do however have a little question concerning Mr. Gilder's source > for attributing "bandwidth is a replacement for switching" to Claude > Shannon. Appended are excerpts of three of Mr. Gilder's earlier > articles in which makes this attribution. I have scoured Shannon's "A > Mathematical Theory of Communication" in vain. It was a good point that Dave made. I regard Shannon's "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" as somewhat of a bible myself. And I believe Dave probably was correct. However, it is my opinion, I think Gilder probably used his 'poetic license' a little with regards to this one. His original reference was in his 'fibersphere' article if I remember correctly. I believe his point was that in using bandwidth you don't have to worry about switching because a high enough bandwidth permits a lot of information to be sent which can be tuned out at the destination according to what one desires. It's similar to attributing a car falling off a cliff as being what Newton stated. It is my personal feeling that Gilder's main contribution is in his outlook and analysis of the areas he has talked about. Even though Dave is most likely correct in his point, I still enjoy George's way of presenting his visions and versions of the world. We should all be happy to have him do this. And in regard to the point you made Pat, I would hope that George Gilder would look over what archives you have and update it with any missing articles. His work is very important to us all. Sincerely, John Eichler ------------------------------ From: aboritz@cybernex.net (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Congressman Wants to Ban Spam Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 10:07:36 -0400 In article , brianm@ricochet.net (Diablo Cat) wrote: > I tend to believe that based on the First Amendment, spam should be > legal... No, Brian, that's not even CLOSE to being true. You have NO rights where MY domain, email account, or other email systems, are concerned, beyond those *I* grant to you. Neither you, nor anyone with less honorable intentions, has the "right" to force me to pay for their commercial activities (spamming). Access to my mail systems, and mail system users, is a *privilege*, not a "right," and I can damage you financially beyond your wildest dreams if I catch you trying to enter after I've made it clear that your entrance is forbidden. In some states, like New Jersey, that can also mean criminal charges and jail time, depending upon the extent of the intrusion and the intent of the intruder. > Since bytes are now purchased, because some people have to pay for the > amount of email they get, or the connect time is charged, it will be > interesting to see how far this will go. "NOW PURCHASED?" I, and others with uucp domains, have been "purchasing" INBOUND, as well as outbound mail transport services for YEARS. We've also "now" purchased (for years) newsfeeds through which countless morons pump advertisements, and LOTS of useless garbage, with the same effect. UUCP customers, like me, have been paying for every minute of connect time for a LONG time. Unlimited personal PPP accounts are relatively new, and are radically different from their uucp counterparts (function and billing). It is VERY unusual to find mail domain services for other than a single user, that DON'T have a per minute price tag. The sooner email neophytes learn that there has been a lot more to the Internet than "chat rooms," and other AOL'isms, for many years, the sooner we'll find a less expensive (and codified) solution to spam harassment. ------------------------------ From: osman@NTCSAL01DA.ntc.nokia.com (Rich Osman) Organization: Nokia Telecommunications Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 07:35:03 +0300 Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available > ROCKLEDGE, FLORIDA...May 27, 1997...Transend Corporation advanced > modem speeds to new heights, without the need for digital connections > at either end, with their announcement today of the Transend > Sixty-Seven, delivering speeds of 67 kbps both upstream and > downstream, over existing analog phone lines. Which begs the next question, if there is an intervening digital connection like, oh, say , any modern switch this thing rolls over and falls back severely right? ------------------------------ From: bowenb@best.com (William H. Bowen) Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 23:16:59 GMT Reply-To: bowenb@best.com phr@netcom.com (Paul Rubin) wrote: > In article <05.30.97.988e32q4@telecom-digest.org> is written: >> Below is a press release sent to me recently regarding a new modem >> now available which is extremely fast. It should make it a lot >> easier to get massive amounts of spam out on the net faster than >> ever before! .... if you are not interested in reading a >> press release praising new modem technology, then stop reading >> here and delete this message. > Why the heck did you post this ad? Since when is multiplexing two > modems on two phone lines new technology? The Telebit Netblazer was > doing that in the 80's, and it wasn't new then either. Paul, Some paging terminals (such as the BBL System III) have network setups that allow multiplexing of up to 8 lines. They did that so that you could move a great amount of data with the 1200 BPS modems that where available when the System III was designed (early 1980s). It was VERY handy when you where doing both voice and digital paging, since you could move the larger amounts of data necessary to transmit the digitized voice without delaying the digital paging data. With the 8 modem setup, each modem actually became 1 bit of an 8-bit parallel transfer scheme. Not "state-of-the-art" by today's standards, but it worked rather well. There is an old phase that says "Everthing that is old becomes new again". Looks like this is a case for that old phrase. Regards, Bill Bowen bowenb@best.com ------------------------------ From: notye@nometronet.nocom (Tye McQueen) Subject: Re: New 911 System Press Release Date: 2 Jun 1997 14:59:22 -0500 Organization: Texas Metronet, Inc (login info (214/488-2590 - 817/571-0400)) Jim Jacobs writes: > Berks County, Pa. to become first region in nation to offer improved 9-1-1 > service from LifeSafety Solutions > The new service goes a step further than the Enhanced 9-1-1 currently > in use by Berks County and many municipalities across the nation, > which only provides emergency call centers with the phone number and > address of a 9-1-1 caller. With 911Plus, when a subscriber calls 9-1-1 > for help, a simultaneous transmission of their personal information is > routed from the 911Plus database and delivered via computer screen to > the 9-1-1 call taker at the time the emergency call is answered. This has been available for over a decade. I used to work for one of many companies that would transform the phone number provided by E911 into any type of information the emergency service providers cared to track and made that information available immediately upon receipt of a call. We even provided information about your neighbors. > LifeSafety Solutions will provide the necessary 911Plus hardware and > software at no cost to the Berks County public safety 9-1-1 > center. The optional subscription service will cost households eight > dollars per month (billed on their local telephone bill) or a > discounted $84 per year for those consumers preferring to prepay for a > year's service. The system is expected to be placed into public > service on August 1. Here is the part that _is_ new -- a new marketing idea. It will be interesting to see if they are profitable and what level of customer service they are able to maintain. No mention of how they plan to audit their database to ensure that it stays accurate. How does one test whether their service is working? Not a service I personally would pay that much for. It sounds like there is close cooperation with the emergency service providers, which is important. I wish them luck and hope their dream of improved emergency service is realized. It certainly has potential. Tye McQueen Nothing is obvious unless you are overlooking something http://www.metronet.com/~tye/ (scripts, links, nothing fancy) Remove "no"s from address to reply (sorry for the inconvenience). ------------------------------ From: Thomas P. Brisco Subject: Re: New 911 System Press Release Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 09:53:03 -0400 Organization: ICon CMT Jim Jacobs wrote: > Berks County, Pa. to become first region in nation to offer improved 9-1-1 > service from LifeSafety Solutions > WYNNEWOOD, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 29, 1997--Berks County, Pa. is > about to become the first area in the country to adopt a new > generation of 9-1-1 call center technology designed to improve > emergency response procedures and help save lives. > 911Plus is a new breakthrough technology introduced in January 1997 by > LifeSafety(TM) Solutions, Inc. of Wynnewood. The nationwide service > provides police, fire and emergency medical services with critical > personal information about subscribers such as medical history and > preexisting conditions as well as the location of children, the > elderly or the infirm within a household. In addition, a designated > third party (such as a relative, care giver or neighbor) who has been > identified as an emergency contact by the subscriber, is notified by > the LifeSafety Solutions Communications Center that a 9-1-1 call was > initiated. * name * address * medical history * preexisting conditions * location of children * elderly or infirm within the household Is no-one else a little worried about the handling of this data? Would this possibly include information about the person's history of (perhaps) mental disabilities (the press release seems to be only oriented towards medical information)? The risks are fairly obvious -- a "good thing" ostensibly, however can the people who are handling the data be trusted with confidentiality? Who has access to the data? Information like this might be a real boon to people looking to rip-off the elderly or infirm, harm children, or looking for females living alone. Thomas P. ``Tp'' Brisco brisco@core.iconnet.net Engineering Group 201.319.5260 (Voice) ICon CMT Corp 201.601.2018 (Fax) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember when 911 was first being implemented throughout the USA and the privacy concerns which were raised at that time? Quite a number of privacy advocates complained that their freedom to call the police 'without getting personally involved' would be diminished. In the days before ESS and 911, tracing of telephone calls was difficult at best and impossible at worst. There were -- and I guess still are -- quite a few people who like calling the police to bad-mouth their neighbors without having to be personally accountable for what they say. In those days also, there were a large number of prank calls to police and fire departments; it seems a lot of people like seeing the excitement of having lots of police cars pull up or fire engines racing everywhere to no avail. We were told in no uncertain terms that the implementation of 911 would lead to massive abuses by the police; that putting in a call to the police to report something you had seen would cause the police to come to your door to question you instead and 'harass' you about your complaint. The same people were especially upset to find out that *67 did not block their identity on calls to 911. Then came more enhanced forms of 911 where the subscriber's name and address were available as well. In the early versions, only the phone number was displayed. That lead to still more complaints from privacy advo- cates. I am not a big fan of the police in most instances. I do see a lot of abuse of authority by them, and at times outright lies to get what they want, but I cannot see any major problem with them having some background information on people who call to seek their assistance. You can always talk to the police using their seven-digit administra- tive number if desired; ditto the fire department. The law here in Illinois for example mandates that police/fire must maintain a seven digit number in addition to any 911 services offered. If you do not want the police to have the information, then avoid using their services as much as possible, or avoid 911. I personally would call the police only in an absolute life-or-death dire emergency, and for no other reason at all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chris Moffett Subject: Re: Emergency Call Services Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:22:00 -0400 Raymond K.S. Yeung wrote: > Does anyone know what a PBX would do when there's no resources > (e.g. outgoing trunks) to support an emergency call (i.e. 911) from a > local PBX subscriber? > Would the PBX block the emergency call? Or would it bump out another > "non-emergency" call to get the needed resources? Any publicized > standards that specify this scenario? I am not aware of a software feature that will do this automatically but, in our Meridian PBX we have a single trunk that is not accessible unless you dial 911. This guarantees that there will always be an outgoing line available (we use smart trunks and in the event of a power fail the analog trunk has a better chance of working that the digital circuits) and it gives the 911 center a place to call back. Any calls to that number will ring direct to the security desk in the building. If anyone does know of a software feature that will accomplish the same thing (on a Nortel Meridian PBX) I would like to know. Chris Moffett MFS/Worldcom ------------------------------ From: bowenb@best.com (William H. Bowen) Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 23:08:51 GMT Reply-To: bowenb@best.com ellis@ftel.net (Rick Ellis) wrote: > In article , Jim Gottlieb > wrote: >> In article , >>> someone has to stop this proliferation of area codes ... or the term >>> will simply lose its meaning. >> If they had just listened to me :-) years ago when I proposed 8-digit >> dialing, then we wouldn't be in this mess today. > I can't help wondering just how many phone numbers are eaten by the > practice of assigning a number to each incoming line even if they are > in a hunt group. If an ISP puts 1000 lines in a POP, they get 1000 > phone numbers. All they really wanted was one phone number. I don't > get it. Rick, I don't know about other LECs, but about two years ago, partically in an effort to "save" numbers, Pac Bell has changed the way they allocate numbers to DID trunks. Prior to this change, each trunk was assigned a number as part of the trunk ID: for example, in one of the trunk groups at work, the first one is labeled 47DINV4159682000, the second one 47DINV4159862001. Now, each trunk group is assigned one number, with a DID line number (starting with 0 (zero) appended to it. As an example, one of the new trunks from Mountain View is labeled 4159695000DID0, the second line 4159695000DID1 and so forth. Also, they are converting existing trunk groups to the new numbering scheme as time permits, and are doing it "enmass" when COs are converted to 5ESS switches. This may not save all that many numbers, hey but each little bit helps. Now the fun part: all these trunk IDs in the Mountain View area will change 8/1 when the 650 area code split comes into effect :)) Oh fun: and I'm the one who handles trunk records (so you KNOW I'll be having fun then!!). Regards, Bill Bowen bowenb@best.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 20:44:34 -0700 From: rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin) Subject: Re: Stopping the Splits On 29 May 1997 03:27:54 PDT, ellis@ftel.net (Rick Ellis) said: > I can't help wondering just how many phone numbers are eaten by the > practice of assigning a number to each incoming line even if they are > in a hunt group. If an ISP puts 1000 lines in a POP, they get 1000 > phone numbers. All they really wanted was one phone number. I don't > get it. I think this practice was justifiable back when analog trunks were the norm. If you had a problem with one line in a trunk, it made sense to keep the capability to dial in on a particular line. Now we have digital entrance facilities, and it seems that there's really no need anymore. Perhaps someone in the biz can explain why 'tis so. I have heard that lines on some outbound-only trunks can be provisioned with otherwise unassignable numbers like 001-xxxx and so on in order to conserve number space. Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com Ever feel like you're being watched? You will. ------------------------------ From: craig@rmit.EDU.AU (Craig Macbride) Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? Date: 2 Jun 1997 17:03:25 GMT Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. The Old Bear writes: > PCS -- will require more than 100,000 cellular towers to > provide reliable service. More than 300 communities already have > revolted, imposing moratoria on cell tower construction, and the > movement is growing. > Fueling the problem are fears that property values will be adversely > affected by the giant structures There are several solutions to this. In Queensland, we have some towers being built to look like palm trees. From a distance, it's hard to tell the real palms from the GSM antennae. Apparently the same company who makes those ones has previously built similar disguised towers in Canada. (Except that theirs are not palm trees!) This costs the phone company more, and degrades coverage area of the device slightly, but it means they don't get complaints from residents. Also, there are many tall structures already in which they can be hidden. Now, when the organisations that have those structures would like some extra income, the two parties can often come to a mutually beneficial agreement. A number of churches with tall, large crosses outside are having them replaced by GSM antennae contructed in the same shape as the original crosses. Craig Macbride URL: http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~craigm ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: I am Really Very Concerned Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 01:20:00 EDT I mentioned earlier Monday evening that my situation here may be deteriorating regards my health. Maybe it is only an anxiety attack I am having, or it may be more severe, or the 'real thing' once again. At this point I really do not know what tomorrow will bring when the doctor sees me, or indeed if I will even accept his advice if it is not to my liking. I'll try to stay in touch and let all of you know where things are going. If you have not heard from me after a couple days, then things probably took a turn for the worst. Or perhaps, a turn for the best. I hope this is just a false alarm, I really do. Kind regards, PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #147 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 3 09:04:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA22772; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:04:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:04:28 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706031304.JAA22772@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #148 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Jun 97 09:04:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 148 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Call Forward No Answer Problem (Alan Boritz) Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List (Peter Morgan) ISDN Analogue Adaptors (Anbjrn Myren) Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available (Robert Holloman, Jr.) Toll-Free ANI Readback Number (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Emergency Call Services (David Clayton) Cleaning Out the Mailbox (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: aboritz@cybernex.net (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Call Forward No Answer Problem Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 01:16:54 -0400 In article , Michael Hayworth wrote: > We are having an odd problem and ending up with a great deal of > finger-pointing and very little help on the part of SWBT. Perhaps > someone can help me figure out what magic phrase I need to use to turn > on the light for either their repair or order department. > We have a local POTS line from SWBT which has call forward busy and > call forward no answer on it. The line forwards to an 800 line which > is on one of my WorldCom T-1s. > We get most calls in just fine and they forward okay. However, if we > get a call that forwards, then another one soon behind it (while the > first is still connected, it appears), the local line will simply ring > endlessly without forwarding. Bell, of course, can't find a problem, > so they're claiming that the problem has to be in my 800 lines.But we > know that we can stack multiple calls onto the 800 line just fine. The > only time we have the problem is with the forwarding from the CO line. It appears that your local telco's switch is not properly handling calls through the two call-forwarding features. In the scenario you described, was the first call passed to the 800 number via call-forward-on-no-answer? If it was, try busying out the line in question and try the experiment again. If the second forwarded call goes through on the second attempt, then you've narrowed down which feature is being corrupted by the other. > I am familiar with having to order multiple voice paths on an RCF > number, but my understanding was that on a local line with call > forward, this isn't something I have to do. One repair tech at Bell > told me that I DID need to order another voice path, and sent me to > business services... The repair tech didn't know what he was talking about. He probably told you that story to get you off his back. Your callers should either be getting your 800 number, or a busy signal. I found a similar problem with an older SL1's generic software package some years back. Northern Telecom wouldn't admit there was a problem, but I could demonstrate that secretarial override on a line with manual call-forwarding active, would wipe the switch's memory locations used to control call-forwarding for that station. > Or, maybe, the > problem is with SWBT, in which case I need to talk to the repair > department, even though they just sent me over. But, then, I'm sure I > don't need to elaborate on this cycle with the residents of these > groups. Forget about talking to repair department at SWB. They've blown you off, and probably will continue to do so as long as you listen. File a complaint with your state's equivalent of a Public Utilities Commission and tell them SWB knows they have a switch software problem, are refusing to fix it, are refusing to provide a tariff'd service for which you are paying, and ask them to order SWB to restore service immediately. Then, if they don't fix it, after hearing from the regulatory agency, wait 24 to 48 hours and file ANOTHER complaint. Don't forget to document every phone call with a SWB employee, you'll need it to document another complaint when they don't act. Don't be afraid to file complaints with the regulatory agency that oversees your local telco. Quite often, the volume of those complaints are used in a formula to calculate raises or other benefits for the telco's management employees (as they do in New York). ------------------------------ From: Peter Morgan Subject: Re: Of Course, If You Buy the Non-AOL Users Mailing List ... Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 01:41:15 +0100 In message henry mensch writes: > ... and you make it available freely on the web ... then having $60 > won't be the gating factor to send anyone on that list junk mail > anymore. In turn, this could open the floodgates to those folks > listed on that list. Agreed. 1) could be password protected (but that would be a headache) 2) I could do a search for any addresses recipients of this list want checked, and e-mail you back with a "found" or "not found" 3) I could (with a bit of help) put it in a script accessed via a web page but disallow any "match all" characters, so you can make a search without me being available [all our phone calls are chargeable here, and even local call rate to ISP mounts up ] I did suggest that copyright could prevent it being made available and Henry has identified a significant flaw that would occur if it was online for all to download. In the UK, some posters have completely abandoned showing any useful e-mail address. Let's hope that the law makers get rid of the problem, before we all throw our postings through anonymous forwarding services. Peter ------------------------------ From: Anbjrn Myren Subject: ISDN Analogue Adaptors Date: 3 Jun 1997 06:52:01 GMT Organization: Statoil I'm soon getting ISDN in my house. It a pure ISDN (2 lines), with no analogue lines. In order to still be able to use my USR33.6 voice/fax - modem,(as well as the wireless phone and the burglar-alarm system) I'll be needing an ISDN to analogue adapter. In Norway there is only one supplier of these adaptors (Telenor), and I feel that they are a bit overpriced. They charge 1490,- NOK for an adaptor with 2 analogue outputs, and 2490,- NOK for the one with 4 outputs. 1490,- NOK = 130 2490,- NOK = 216 However, these adaptors follow the European standard, so I'm free to buy any adaptor from another European country. Does anyone know how much these cost in UK or other countries? Please reply by email, mailto:amyren@online.no Anbjorn Myren, Norway, A4000 IRC: Anmy ------------------------------ From: Robert Holloman, Jr. Subject: Re: New, Very Fast Modem Available Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 13:16:11 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Reply-To: holloman@mindspring.com Brett Frankenberger wrote: > However, most modem manufacturers today understate their effective > speeds (when running in async mode) anyway. The new "56KBps modem" > technonogy, when it actually runs at 56KBps on the wire, can handle > close to 70KBps "effective" async throughput *without compression*. Do you know where I can get my hands on a 56-kilo-BYTES-per-second modem? Mine's only a 56-kilo-BITS-per-second modem. > This is because "modern" modulation protocols are synchronous on the > analog side, so the start and stop bits don't need to be sent across > the wire. So if you stream 70000 bits per second out the serial port, > that's: > 70000 / (8 data bits + 1 stop bit + 1 start bit) = 7000 bytes per second > On the wire, that corresponds to 7000*8=56000 bits per second. Of > course, there is a bit of overhead ... so you might really only be able > to go 67000 ( :) ) async bits per second without compression. In other words, synchronous is a lot more efficient than asynchronous. All this means is that we need to set our serial ports at least 25% higher than the maximum DCE speed of our modern modems to prevent the port from being a bottleneck. (And or course, even higher when using data compression.) > So it wouldn't be too terribly inaccurate to call a 56K modem a 70K > modem. I'd say it would be terribly confusing and unnecessary. By this logic, we'd call it a 77Kbps modem if 11 (instead of 10) bits per character were normally used on the DTE side. Please, let's stick to RAW bit speeds when talking DCE (and DTE) speeds. (Remember the confusion when modem companies called their 9600bps MNP modems 19200bps, or some such?) Now, calling a 56Kbps modem a "modem that can, under ideal conditions and without compression, yield data throughput nearly as high as that of an asynchronous link operating at 70Kbps using 10-bit characters" would be pretty accurate. :) ------------------------------ From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Subject: Toll-Free ANI Readback Number Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 09:42:21 -0500 Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Reply-To: gordon@crashelex.com I received an email today from someone selling "Breakthrough" products. While I didn't order anything from them today, I did discover that they offer a free ANI readback service -- how very kind of them. When you dial (888) 212-8846 you will hear a message telling you that you have reached a "bulletproof" order line which will only accept two calls from your number. Then they read back your number. This should be useful for nailing down all those unmarked extensions in your wiring closet. It could also be useful for determining the number of any payphone you may be at, where the number tag is missing or illegible. Gordon S. Hlavenka www.crashelex.com gordon@crashelex.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Some of us still think it's important. ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Emergency Call Services Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 09:30:45 GMT Organization: Customer of Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Chris Moffett contributed the following: > Raymond K.S. Yeung wrote: >> Does anyone know what a PBX would do when there's no resources >> (e.g. outgoing trunks) to support an emergency call (i.e. 911) from a >> local PBX subscriber? >> Would the PBX block the emergency call? Or would it bump out another >> "non-emergency" call to get the needed resources? Any publicized >> standards that specify this scenario? > I am not aware of a software feature that will do this automatically > but, in our Meridian PBX we have a single trunk that is not accessible > unless you dial 911. This guarantees that there will always be an > outgoing line available (we use smart trunks and in the event of a > power fail the analog trunk has a better chance of working that the > digital circuits) and it gives the 911 center a place to call back. > Any calls to that number will ring direct to the security desk in the > building. > If anyone does know of a software feature that will accomplish the > same thing (on a Nortel Meridian PBX) I would like to know. Switchview has a "Call Control" module that could probably be made to work in that way. I know it can detect when a "911" call is attempted, (by various "sneaky" ways), then it has the capability to go into the switch and disable and then enable trunks. It may be able to queue the original call and send it out when a trunk is free after the forced disabling. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Cleaning Out the Mailbox Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 08:56:00 EDT I really could not sleep very well last night so I decided to get up and do still another issue of the Digest and in the process clean out mail which had arrived overnight. From about two a.m. when I logged out until now -- about seven hours later -- fourteen pieces of spam and four legitimate messages, mostly from well-wishers. Amazing! I shudder to think of what my mailbox will look like if I in fact am off line for an extended period when I get back. If I get back; that's what bothers me a little right now. Anyway, keep up your good work and fight spam as long as you can. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #148 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Jun 10 09:21:29 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA18947; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:21:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:21:29 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706101321.JAA18947@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #149 TELECOM Digest Tue, 10 Jun 97 09:21:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 149 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Getting Back Into Service (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Bill Newkirk) Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? (Curtis Wheeler) Re: ISDN Analogue Adaptors (Lars Poulsen) Domain Name Sold For $150,000 (Greg Monti) Digital Pads (Robert Holloman, Jr.) Repeated Failure in MCI Backbone Node (Mike McCune) CDPD Scam? (Robert Holloman, Jr.) FTC Junk Email Workshop Online, June 12, 1997 (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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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, 10 Jun 1997 08:41:49 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Getting Back Into Service I got on line late Tuesday night to try and sort through a lot of mail and get some semblance of organization here once again. A summary of the mail: 1) A couple hundred notes inquiring as to my health and sending kind thoughts .... thank you. 2) Spam *everywhere* ... about three hundred pieces of email of a commercial nature; some of them sent two or three times each, no doubt by spammers who could not understand why the messages they sent did not immediatly get posted in c.d.t. 3) A number of messages from people who quite obviously do not read the Digest; they just dump mail to it. I guess they assume someone sits here 24 hours per day to process it into the Digest and newsgroup. One fellow asking to be added to the mailing list wrote *five* times over a week, asking when his subscription would be processed and asking 'why was he being ignored'. 4) A script failure of some sort (I am still deciphering it) which caused root to write me about a hundred times telling me that a cron job had failed to execute. 5) Then of course the idiot who sent that big humongous piece of nonsense -- line after line after line -- to the interactive 'chat' feature of the web page. 6) A letter from someone who pointed out that once again some spammer is raiding all the names and email addresses he can find in c.d.t. and sending mail to them as 'telecom professional' with whatever piece of junk he is selling or scam he is running. I shall not bore you with the events of my life except to say that I did not go to the hospital; I did not have 'heart surgery' as someone spread around (I got a call from Bill Pfieffer telling me of email he received claiming that about me); I am feeling a little better but not terribly great; and I will try to continue the Digest for awhile longer. People who attempted to subscribe to the Digest during May and up to this point who have not been added to the list may wish to to write me again. But please check your mail today and tomorrow before you do as I have added quite a few names; even the one who wrote five times to insist I was ignoring him. PAT ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 15:30:06 -0400 Organization: Rockwell Collins, Inc. Reply-To: wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com John R. Levine wrote: > sit on a large ugly tower on top of a hill, and siting them is very First, drop out the emotional response - "ugly". it's a large tower. They all pretty much look the same. Most people quit noticing 'em about six months after construction is finished. > large cell tower in a farmer's field. A lot of us don't see any > reason they can't colocate with Cell One's tower across the lake.) Because the Cell One rental is probably many times the cost of constructing one for their own system. there also are problems of who's responsible for what if two competing companies share the same structure. Bill Newkirk Collins General Aviation Division Publications Department Rockwell Collins, Inc., Melbourne Florida wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com ------------------------------ From: Curtis Wheeler Subject: Re: Where to Put 100,000 Cell Phone Towers? Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 16:17:06 -0700 Organization: Unorganized Reply-To: cwheeler@ccnet.com Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , The Old Bear > wrote: >> More than 300 communities already have revolted, imposing moratoria >> on cell tower construction, and the movement is growing. > My town newspaper has had several articles recently on the > negotiations taking place with PCS companies. If my interpretation is > correct, the law doesn't allow communities to prevent tower > construction. However, it does allow them to specify where the towers > may be constructed, and negotiate payment for the use of town > property. Although there's some NIMBY feeling, allowing towers to be > installed on places like fire stations is apparently seen as a > money-making proposition. Local governements cannot stop the installation of radio systems based on health concerns. They can however, still regulate on asthetics, etc. Cell sites may or may not be "money-making" proposistions for the landlord. We host the two major cellular companies and a coupld of smaller radio service providers at a facility we own. We don't "make money" (as in profit), it just subsidozes what we already have to spend on the facility. Curtis ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: ISDN Analogue Adaptors Date: 9 Jun 1997 16:03:06 -0700 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article Anbjrn Myren writes: > I'll be needing an ISDN to analogue adapter. > In Norway there is only one supplier of these adaptors (Telenor), and > I feel that they are a bit overpriced. > They charge 1490,- NOK for an adaptor with 2 analogue outputs, and 2490,- > NOK for the one with 4 outputs. > 1490,- NOK = 130 > 2490,- NOK = 216 How much does an ISDN telephone cost ? The adapter has to contain the same circuitry, including a microprocessor, an ISDN channel interface, ISDN call control signaling protocol software etc. PLUS a subscriber line interface circuit to control the telephone you plug into it with dial-tone generation, tone/pulse signaling recognition, and ... the hardest piece: Generation of high-voltage ringing signals. The prices listed seem extremely reasonable given the very limited market for these devices. / 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Jun 1997 14:30:43 -0400 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Domain Name Sold For $150,000 A {New York Times} story on June 5, 1997, notes that a new high price has just been set for an internet domain name. The domain name was sold for $150,000 to an undisclosed buyer in Texas. The new owner won't use the name until its web site is operational in four months. The seller was banking software developer Business Systems International of London which had used the address for its web site. Business Systems paid nothing for the address four years ago. The broker who arranged the sale was Idnames.com. The story notes that many domain name sale prices are secret because the transactions end up in disputes and are settled, with the terms of the settlement sealed. A previously-well-known high price was the sale of to C-Net for $15,000 in 1996. Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com ------------------------------ From: Robert Holloman, Jr. Subject: Digital Pads Date: Sun, 08 Jun 1997 02:49:29 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Reply-To: holloman@mindspring.com Anyone know much about digital pads? Some folks, especially here in the Raleigh area, aren't able to get x2 (US Robotics' new modem technology) connections above 33333bps on local calls, but are able to get much higher speeds on long distance calls. A BellSouth employee seems to have narrowed the problem down to digital pads. Here's a post he made to a MindSpring newsgroup, followed by my reply. I'm hoping someone might be able to explain in more detail how pads work and maybe speculate on how 56K modems might deal with them. --- start of response --- About me: I am a contractor/vendor working at BellSouth for the last 2 years. I am a unix sys admin for the Field Access System. This is the system that the field techs call to get & work their jobs. I have access to people who know stuff about the BST phone network. We are moving into our new house at the end of the month. About my phone line: My phone line goes to an integrated SLC96 which is only a few thousand feet away. It is connected via T1's to the Oak Mountain exchange. My X2 experience: (All LD calls are via AT&T unless otherwise stated) Ld Calls to USR's BBS resulted in 45-48K connects. Ld Calls to Mindspring Atlanta, GA resulted in 45-48K connects Ld Calls to Mindspring Montgomery, Al resulted in 45-48K connects Ld Calls, using AT&T calling card, to Mindspring Birmingham, AL resulted in 45-48K connects Local Calls to Mindspring Birmingham, AL resulted in V.34 (31.2K) connects. Technical info (or what I can remember of it): From the above info, I have made the following assumptions: My line to CO will support X2 LD Calls support X2 Local Calls DO NOT support X2 The network connection to my CO is common to Local & LD The network connection from MS to their CO (Downtown) is common to Local & LD Conclusion?? There must be a difference in the connection between CO's depending on LD or Local. These past few days, I've finally been in touch with people that can help fix my X2 blues. Here is what I have discovered: Calls from my CO to Downtown are trunked directly (different from what I had heard before). AT&T uses the same circuits as BellSouth (They are BellSouth circuits) So what could be causing my problem?? It seems that BellCore defines some "DB Pads" that switch's implement when handling Local & LD calls. For LD there is a 6db Pad, and for Local there is a 3db Pad. Different switch manufacturers provide these "Standard pads (Paddings?)" using their own methods, which they keep to themselves. The 56K modem manufacturers have to guess at how this is done in order to code their modems around it. The only difference my new found friends :) could find in the call path was these "Pads". So with some tweaking & adjusting of my line they said "try it now". CONNECT 48000 !! Wow!! My reaction is "Great, what did you do, and can it stay like that?" Well, for reasons that my become clear shortly, I'm not going to broadcast what they did. My new friend said that he needs to set it back 8( But since I am moving in a month, and if I keep reporting to him my progress and any troubles I have we can treat this as an ongoing test and it will stay good. When we move to our new house, I'm going to call him again and see if we can come to some arrangement about this, and of course try to share this new information with the rest of the world. I shall keep you all informed as things progress, but right now it feels GREAT!! ---------------- Here's my response: You're saying it's the type of padding used and not the amount of padding? That might explain why I see calls that "do" x2 vary up to 6dB and ones that don't vary up to 8dB. ...and what might have happened to 424, which no longer does x2 despite no change in its signal level. Here's a table comparing the peak ATY11 signal level from various calls, relative to what I see on "most LD" calls. Peaks range from -14dB on IBM to -25 on LD calls to BBS's running Imodems. POP Diff Does X2 "Well" --------------- ---- -------------- IBM 878 +5 No MS 846 +3 No Most LD 0 Yes 846/424 - AT&T 0 Yes MS 424 0 was Yes, now No AOL 888 -2 Yes Networks 518 -3 No (same CO as MS 846) Imodems - LD -6 Yes Someone mentioned to me a while back that a 3dB pad, which cuts the signal level in half, is usually done by shifting the bits in the PCM codes by one position, losing the LSB. I would guess (big guess!) x2 tests for pads during startup by sending as series of 11111111's and checking what comes out the other end. (Since the other end is analog, it can't be 100% sure of exactly what comes out.) If 01111111 comes back, then there's 3dB of padding. 00111111 would indicate 6dB (~1/4 of original signal) padding. (If 01111111 comes back most of the time and 01111110 comes back sometimes, would that indicate a 3dB pad with RBS on top?) Maybe some switches use something besides simple bit-shifting, and that throws x2 for a loop (an infinite retrain loop in some cases!). ------------------------------ From: mmccune@loxinfo.co.th (Mike McCune) Subject: Repeated Failure in MCI Backbone Node Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:43:23 GMT Organization: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com Reply-To: mmccune@loxinfo.co.th I live in Thailand. Every single day for at least the last week, during the heart of the business day in Thailand, one of the MCI routers fails and locks me and all of Asia out of a portion of the Internet. It happens at night in the USA, when "no one will notice the failure". Right. Here is the traceroute report showing the problem: loxinfo >date Sat Jun 7 08:56:20 GMT+7 1997 loxinfo >traceroute infothai.com traceroute to infothai.com (192.41.24.88), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 lt-chmai1 (203.146.0.66) 2.106 ms 2.613 ms 2.704 ms 2 bkk-chmai.tnet.co.th (203.146.1.205) 505.108 ms 555.772 ms 625.776 ms 3 lir8 (208.147.1.200) 570.340 ms 504.664 ms 530.860 ms 4 mix-serial4-0.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.189.216.177) 786.701 ms 794.987 ms 863.576 ms 5 core1-fddi-0.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.70.2.161) 773.824 ms 776.394 ms 770.023 ms 6 bordercore1-loopback.Denver.mci.net (166.48.92.1) 791.230 ms * 851.570 ms 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * The seventh hop is hard failure. Every day abround 8-9 AM local time this failure occurs. MCI has known about it. The best they could do was promise to fix it next Monday (I heard through the grapevine, anyway). When I wrote MCI on their Web site, their reply said they would address in the problem in 4-7 working days. That is pathetic response for an Internet backbone company. One who is tired of poor performance ... Mike McCune ------------------------------ From: Robert Holloman, Jr. Subject: CDPD Scam? Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 02:24:33 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Reply-To: holloman@mindspring.com Anyone familiar with this? They are offering a box that will allow unlimited Internet access via CDPD (cellular), and later, satellite. The things they present on their web page (http://207.58.122.163/) just don't add up: 1) It's MLM. 2) "Using a patented compression method, AlphaCom has developed a system that will give us a robust throughput of 56Kps to ~153kps (19200 x 8)." I haven't looked into CDPD recently, but 19200 sounds right. Even if their compression is better than the v.42bis used on modern modems, nothing's going to significantly compress ZIPs/GIFs/JPEGs/etc, which makes up much of what most folks send across the Internet. So, it's actually worse than a V.34 modem for most people. 3) "Q: Will there be cellular charges? A: No. There will be NO cellular charges or roaming charges. Just the flat rate, $20/month for unlimited access." Last time I checked, CDPD was not cheap and charged by the byte. It's hard to believe GTE would cut them such an incredible deal. (A few months back several ISP's were offering unlimited access via 800 number. I thought that sounded too good to be true, and it indeed turned out to be a scam.) 4) "Q: Won't the system get congested? A: There is little chance of that. Using the CDPD system, there can be an unlimited number of people logged on at once. The system can support millions and million of people simultaneously." Yeah, right. Voice calls take priority over CDPD. It's not terribly uncommon to get that "all circuits are busy" tone on voice calls during peak hours in some areas. 5) "Only $350.00. We are only taking a deposit of $175.00 right now, you will be billed the additional amount 10 days before shipping." Take the money and run? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Jun 1997 22:10:44 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FTC Junk Email Workshop Online, June 12, 1997! Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: From: shabbir@vtw.org (Shabbir J. Safdar) Subject: You can attend the FTC Junk Email workshop online, June 12, 1997! Date: Fri, 06 Jun 1997 17:27:24 -0400 ****************************************************************************** * * * VTW-ANNOUNCE * * * * The following message is sent to you through vtw-announce, an announcement.* * only list to which you are only added to at your request. To unsubscribe, * * send email to majordomo@vtw.org with the words "unsubscribe vtw-announce" * * in the body of the message. Unsubscribe requests sent back to shabbir will * * not be effective at removing you from the list. * * * ****************************************************************************** JOIN THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION FOR A DISCUSSION OF JUNK EMAIL Concerned about the amount of "junk" email you receive? On Thursday June 12 the Federal Trade Commission will hold a forum on unsolicited commercial email as part of a 3 day public workshop on Internet Privacy issues. The FTC junk email forum will be cybercast live at democracy.net. You can listen to the proceedings via RealAudio, view live pictures, submit your thoughts and comments to the FTC, and discuss the issue with other Internet users in a simultaneous online chat room. DETAILS ON THE EVENT: Date: Thursday, June 12, 1997 Time: 8:45 am - 12:30 pm Eastern Time Place: http://www.democracy.net You will need to have RealAudio and a telnet application installed on your computer. Visit http://www.democracy.net/software/ to download the software for FREE. ____________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND ON THE JUNK EMAIL ISSUE Junk email is one of the most discussed Internet issues today, with emphasis in the press and two pieces of legislation introduced in Congress to address the issue. To learn more about junk email, we suggest that you read the filings of various people to the Federal Trade Commission, available in the "Background" section of the democracy.net page devoted to this event. ____________________________________________________________________________ INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO PARTICIPATE * Federal Trade Commission Junk Email Workshop * DATE: Thursday June 12, 1997 TIME: 8:45 am Eastern (5:45 am Pacific) LOCATION: http://www.democracy.net In advance of the workshop, please visit http://www.democracy.net and make sure you have the RealAudio and telnet software necessary to participate. _____________________________________________________________________________ ABOUT DEMOCRACY.NET The democracy.net is a joint project of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and the Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) to explore ways of enhancing citizen participation in the democratic process via the Internet. To this end, democracy.net hosts live, interactive cybercasts of Congressional Hearings and online town hall meetings with key policy makers. democracy.net is made possible through the generous support of WebActive, Public Access Networks, the Democracy Network, and DIGEX Internet. More information about the project and its sponsors can be found at http://www.democracy.net/about/ To receive democracy.net announcements automatically, please visit our signup form at http://www.democracy.net/ or send mail to majordomo@democracy.net with "subscribe events" in the body of the message. _____________________________________________________________________________ End update no.10 06/06/1997 ============================================================================= ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #149 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jun 12 09:03:44 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA27998; Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:03:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:03:44 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199706121303.JAA27998@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #150 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 Jun 97 09:03:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 150 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Why I Like Murkowski Not Smith (Joe J. Harrison) Spam Class Action Lawsuit (Bruce Pennypacker) Microcell (Fido) Comments in Canada (jfmezei) UCLA Short Course: Integrated Circuit Design (Bill Goodin) NYNEX Replacing Busy Signal With Repeat Dialing Solicitation (Tim Barmann) US West "Pulls" Dry-Copper (DSL) Tariffs (Pete Kruckenberg) Book Review: "Creating Dynamic Web Sites" by Fisher (Rob Slade) Fargo Man Gets Ten Years in Phone Sabotage Case (Scot Wilcoxon) Special RF IC Course: Apply Now, Deadline June 26 (Wireless Group) Job Opportunity: Bi-Lingual PBX Administrator (Dan Gauthier) Job Opportunith: Manager of IT Job in Denver (Jerry Witt) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org 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: Joe.J.Harrison@bra0130.wins.icl.co.uk (Joe Harrison) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:45:54 +0100 Subject: Why I Like Murkowski Not Smith There has been much discussion for and against the two separate anti-spam bills, with .net opinion appearing so far to prefer the idea of the Smith bill (making spam illegal with penalties in the same way as US junk fax laws) over the Murkowski option of legalising spam but with compulsory identifying tags to allow ISP filtering or recipient's ease of deletion. This is assuming I understood these bills correctly, apologies in advance if not. As a Brit resident outside of the United States it might seem presumptive of me to hold an opinion on internal American laws but I'd like to tell you why you should go for the Murkowski option. Here in Bracknell, UK, I get the same junk e-mail from savetrees.com (and others) that you do. Over ninety percent of my junk e-mail originates in the United States. I guess it's the same in other countries. If you pass a law that makes spamming illegal in the US (like junk fax) then I doubt very much that will offer any protection to spam recipients in the rest of the world. To whom could I complain when I open my mailbox one day and find it stuffed with UCE? Conversely however, if you force spammers to identify spam with a tag it would make it that much easier for me to filter it out. Joe ------------------------------ From: Bruce Pennypacker Subject: Spam Class Action Lawsuit Date: 10 Jun 1997 14:11:06 GMT Organization: Applied Language Technologies TELECOM Digest Editor wrote in article : > 2) Spam *everywhere* ... about three hundred pieces of email > of a commercial nature; some of them sent two or three times > each, no doubt by spammers who could not understand why the > messages they sent did not immediatly get posted in c.d.t. You might be glad to hear that an ISP down in Texas has not only received a temporary restraining order against Cyber Promotions, but that they are also preparing to file a class action suit against Cyber Promo and specifically Scamford Wallace on behalf of all registered owners of internet domains. The crux of the class action suit is that Cyber Promo inflicts damage upon ISP's by forging return addresses of spam and that they only stop when individual ISP's take them to court. The purpose of the class action suit is to prevent them from ever forging any internet address of any domain, known or unknown. You can read the text of the request of the TRO and the class action suit at: http://www.webs.com/w/webs001.nsf/Names/Pleading.htm An article in the Houston Chronicle regarding the reason for this suit can be found at: http://www.chron.com/cgi-bin/auth/story/content/chronicle/business/97/06/07/ spamsuit.2-0.html It's a pretty good story that explains how a forged e-mail address on some Cyber Promo spam caused an internet site catering to the handicapped to effectively shut down. Scamford claims that it was sent by a Cyber Promo customer that he had no control over. With a bit of luck, the class action suit will put a huge crimp on Scamfords actions, especially since more and more courts are agreeing that spam constitutes tresspass. Anybody who owns a domain that has been used as a dumping ground for Cyber Promo spam might want to contact the folks at webs.com and offer documentation to include with their request for a class action suit. Bruce [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, so Scamford is going to now rely on the sysadmin excuse of the ages: "I have no control over my users and what they do ..." Since it has served sysadmins well over the years as a way to let users wreck the net, maybe it will work for him also. I suggest burning him at the stake. Let him serve as a sacrifice and an example for spammers everywhere. I hope the court hangs him. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jfmezei Subject: Microcell (Fido) Comments in Canada Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 22:53:25 -0500 Organization: SPC Reply-To: "jfmezei"@videotron.ca.[no.spam] I have recently signed up to the Microcell GSM offering in Canada marketed as Fido. They started in Montreal last year, opened up Quebec City and Ottawa in April and this week, started marketing in Toronto. Vancouver is scheduled to go on-line later this summer. Fido has the advantage of not tying you to a contract. You can cancel anytime without cancellation fees. (Cantel wants three years contracts, with a $20 per unpaid month penalty). Fido concentrates on its "superstores" for sales as it easier to train (and keep control over training) the employees. It does make a rather big difference compared to franchises selling Cantel stuff for instance. Those franchises are not anywhere near as knowledgeable about the intricacies of the services as would a Fido/Microcell employee. Nevertheless, the staff cannot be expected to know everything. Fido is expected to provide roaming agreement with either Bell or Cantel eventually. (Perhaps later this year). At that point, Fido will start to sell bi-phones (GMS-AMPS). Rumour has it that Fido will have a buy-back programme in place to allow existing customers to "upgrade" to the bi phones. The one BIG disapointment I have is that FIDO does not yet support the use of a GSM phone for modem/data/fax transmission (eg: plug laptop into GSM phone). They cannot tell me a fixed date where such a support would be given. Considering that this is one of the big advantages of GSM over other systems with lots of existing hardware (NOKIA does have a PC-CARD modem adapter for its GSM 2190 (North America) phone. FIDO does not yet have a "send SMS message from your computer" service. You can send one from your phone, or go though a voice operator at an 800 number. But I am told that they should have that service out "soon". Cantel has a way to send the equivalent of an SMS message through the web as well as the option of having your phone numeber become and internet address ( 5551212@cantel.ca ) with the first x characters of a message sent to the TDMA telephone. (TDMA only allows 150 characters I beleive). Also, Fido only sells three phones right now: The Nokia 2190 (In the Toronto market, they have an updated 2190 with the better ERF codec, but are getting rid of older stock in Montreal, so you can't get the new one yet); the Ericsson 388; and now the Nortel 175 (I think). (Recent arrival). It will be interesting to see how the rather small GMS-1900 market in North America develops compared to the TDMA and CDMA markets. Three different protocols, three different markets, three different phones, instead of the original one AMPS market. Fido has per second billing for calls in its own network. Cantel also advertises per second "exact" billing but doesn't trumpet the fact that there is a minimum 60 second charge for each call. Is it true that at the 1900mhz band, land stations are spaced about 1.5km apart? Do they look differently from those of the AMPS system? ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: Integrated Circuit Design Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:47:32 -0700 On September 8-10, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Integrated Circuit Design for Wireless Transceivers", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Prof. Asad Abidi and Prof. Behzad Razavi, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA. The field of RF and wireless electronics is growing rapidly. From cellular phones to satellite television, RF design has become an active field for research and development after lying dormant for many years. This course provides a systematic treatment of RF electronics with emphasis on monolithic implementation in VLSI technologies. Beginning with basic concepts and background knowledge from communication and microwave disciplines, the course deals with the design of transceiver architectures and their building blocks: low-noise amplifiers and mixers, oscillators and synthesizers, power amplifiers, and filters. In addition to a methodical study of design issues and techniques, the course presents numerous examples of state-of-the-art work in the field. The material is complemented by several case studies of complete transceiver systems. The course fee is $1195, which includes extensive course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not sold separately. For 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: tim@cybertalk.com (Timothy Barmann) Subject: NYNEX Replacing Busy Signal With Repeat Dialing Solicitation Date: 10 Jun 1997 22:08:55 GMT Organization: The Providence Journal Company In March, one poster from Mass. told of his experience with a new NYNEX service that replaces the repeating tone of a busy signal with a recorded message pitching NYNEX's repeat dialing service. NYNEX wants to bring that service to Rhode Island too and I am writing an article about the service, and about the end of the busy signal as we know it. I'm wondering if anyone is aware of this service being offered in lieu of a busy signal in any other Baby Bell areas. Has anyone else run into trouble using modems or getting NYNEX to block the new service? Thanks for any help. Tim Barmann telecom writer Providence Journal-Bulletin tim@cybertalk.com 401-277-7369 ------------------------------ From: pete@inquo.inquo.net (Pete Kruckenberg) Subject: US West "Pulls" Dry-Copper (DSL) Tariffs Date: 10 Jun 1997 15:50:24 GMT Organization: inQuo Internet (801) 530-7160 Interactive Week is carrying an article (http://www4.zdnet.com/intweek/daily/970606f.html) regarding US West's recent pulling of their dry copper tariff in all but one of the states that they service. A more recent article (http://www4.zdnet.com/intweek/daily/970609d.html), apparently unrelated, discusses US West's solicitation of wireless local loop (WLL), and their intention to move to wireless in order to free up copper for xDSL. This is incredible. Now that the law requires competition, US West is trying to all but eliminate competition in the DSL market, as well as any other service that requires copper to the home. Even other carriers considering WLL to get to residences will run up against competition from US West, but they'll be effectively out of the market between ISDN and T1 speeds, especially in the residential market. I have a few questions about this, that I'm hoping someone can help answer. First, can US West arbitrarily "pull" a tariff like this? I find it especially odd that some customers (existing dry copper clients) will be able to continue ordering/using dry copper, but nobody else can. Second, what exactly are the provisions of the '96 Telecom Act relating to dry copper, as far as CLECs and others are concerned? I've heard several CLECs complain that they cannot get access to dry copper, and I'm wondering why that is the case? Third, as an ISP (who is effectively unable to gain access to co-locate space at the CO, because we're not a CLEC), what is the best course of action to try to resolve this issue? My guess is that as long as US West doesn't offer the service, the PUC/PSC cannot force them to. Is this true? Is my only recourse through legislation? I have suspected that US West would try to pull this kind of thing eventually. Utah is their pet state for DSL service, and I suspect that as soon as they saw how simple and cost-effective it can be, they started figuring out how to monopolize it. They're doing well at that, for sure. Any insight would be much appreciated. Pete Kruckenberg pete@inquo.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:32:46 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Creating Dynamic Web Sites" by Fisher BKCRDWBS.RVW 970227 "Creating Dynamic Web Sites", Scott Fisher, 1997, 0-201-44207-8, U$24.95/C$34.00 %A Scott Fisher %C P.O. Box 520, 26 Prince Andrew Place, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 2T8 %D 1997 %G 0-201-44207-8 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. %O U$24.95/C$34.00 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 bkexpress@aw.com %P 368 %T "Creating Dynamic Web Sites" Fisher's book is extremely practical and useful, and I recommend it to anyone using graphics or multimedia on a web site. That said, I do not want to create any misunderstandings. Fisher does *not* deal with the "how to" of producing graphics, sound, video, or animation. There are plenty of books that cover the details. He looks more at the "what": will your media be understood and effective. Will your page be easy to use, useful, and not frustrating for the person behind the browser. Of course, any number of books try to do that, too. But Fisher has an excellent grasp of what web surfers will look at -- and what they won't look at twice. A number of exercises help you to get inside the heads of potential viewers. Even established web masters will find themselves challenged by this book. (And there are a number that I dearly wish would read it.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKCRDWBS.RVW 970227 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse Please note the Peterson story - http://www.netmind.com/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ Subject: Fargo Man Gets Ten Years in Phone Sabotage Case Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 22:29:34 CDT From: sewilco@fieldday.mn.org (Scot Wilcoxon) In an AP story on page B5, the {Minneapolis Star Tribune} reported on May 30 that Michael Damron, 33, was sentenced to ten years in prison for sabotaging phone lines. On Jan 21, 1995, he cut U.S. West communicatons cables at five sites around Fargo in order to disable burglar alarms at an electronics store he then robbed. He disrupted service for thousands of people in North Dakota and Minnesota. He also must pay U.S. West $250,000. Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org ------------------------------ From: wireless@ece.orst.edu (Wireless Group) Subject: Special RF IC Course: Apply Now, Deadline June 26 Date: 10 Jun 1997 08:54:25 -0700 Organization: Network for Education and Research in Oregon RF IC Design For Wireless Communication Systems July 7-11, 1997 Portland, Oregon http://www.ocate.edu/wireless Five day Intensive short course on Practical aspects of RF IC's for Wireless Communication. This course is intended to give engineers and system designers a wider perspective and practical understanding of RF IC design, testing, measurement, and implementation for wireless systems. The topics covered are RF Transceiver design, front-end RF & IF circuits, Mixers, LNAs, and Frequency Synthesizers. Circuits in CMOS, Bi-CMOS, and GaAs RF technologies are discussed. Speakers: Cynthia Baringer, Hughes Research Labs Ken Hansen, Motorola Lawrence E. Larson, UC San Diego Vijay Nair, Motorola S. Rappaport, Virginia Tech Behzad Razavi, UCLA Doug Rytting, Hewlett-Packard Stewart Taylor, TriQuint Semiconductor Frederick Weiss, Analog Devices Organizer: Sayfe Kiaei, Oregon State University Sponsered by:Oregon Center for Advanced Technology Education ============================================================= SPACE IS LIMITED -- PLEASE REGISTER EARLY -- REGISTRATION DEADLINE IS NEAR ============================================================= MONDAY, JULY 7 WIRELESS SYSTEM ISSUES 8:30-10:00 Mobile Radio Propagation and Fading Ted Rappaport, Virginia Tech 10:30-Noon Modulation and Multiple Access Ted. Rappaport, Virginia Tech 1:30-3:00 RF Transceiver Overview Ken Hansen, Motorola 3:30-5:00 Transceiver Circuits Ken Hansen, Motorola TUESDAY, JULY 8 TRANSCEIVER AND FREQUENCY SYNTHESIZERS 8:30-10:00 RF Transceiver Architectures - Part I Behzad Razavi, UCLA 10:30-Noon RF Transceiver Architectures - Part II Behzad Razavi, UCLA 1:30-3:00 Frequency Synthesizers Lawrence E. Larson, UC San Diego 3:30-5:00 VCO Design Lawrence E. Larson, UC San Diego WEDNESDAY, JULY 9 AGC, MIXERS & LNAS 8:30-10:00 Phase Noise in Oscillators Behzad Razavi, UCLA 10:30-Noon AGC Design Lawrence E. Larson, UC San Diego 1:30-3:00 Design of CMOS and Bipolar LNAs Behzad Razavi, UCLA 3:30-5:00 Design of CMOS and Bipolar Mixers Behzad Razavi, UCLA THURSDAY, JULY 10 HIGH-FREQUENCY GaAs CIRCUITS & POWER AMPLIFIERS 8:30-10:00 High Frequency RF Circuit Design Vijay Nair, Motorola 10:30-Noon GaAs RF IC Designs for Wireless Applications Vijay Nair, Motorola 1:30-3:00 Power Amplifiers I: Overview of PA Topologies Stewart Taylor, TriQuint Semiconductor 3:30-5:00 Power Amplifiers II: GaAs MESFET PA Circuits Stewart Taylor, TriQuint Semiconductor FRIDAY, JULY 11 RF TESTING & TECHNOLOGIES 8:30-10:00 Practical Aspects of Designing Manufacturable RFICs Cynthia Baringer, Hughes Research Labs 10:30-Noon RF Measurement Doug Rytting, Hewlett-Packard 1:30-3:00 Technology Options, Modeling and Testing for RFICs - Part I Frederick Weiss, Analog Devices 3:30-5:00 Technology Options, Modeling and Testing for RFICs - Part II Frederick Weiss, Analog Devices ================================================================== REGISTRATION FORM: PLEASE FAX OR EMAIL THIS PAGE TO: Oregon Center for Advanced Technology Education 18640 NW Walker Road, Suite 1010w Beaverton, OR 97006 Tel: (503) 725-2200 Fax: (503) 725-2201 Email: info@ocate.edu Name: __________________________________________________________ Company: _______________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________ City/State/Zip: ________________________________________________ Email: _________________________________________________________ Work Phone: ____________________________________________________ Payment: $1695 [ ]Check [ ]Visa [ ]Mastercard Account#____________________________ Exp. Date___________________________ Signature __________________________ All registration materials must be received by June 26 SPACE IS LMILTED -- PLEASE REGISTER EARLY TO MAKE SURE YOU CAN ATTEND THE COURSE. ------------------------------ From: Dan Gauthier Subject: Job Opportunity: Bi-Lingual PBX Administrator Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:57:25 -0500 Organization: Tellus Technologies BI-LINGUAL PBX ADMINISTRATOR (Turkish/English) BRIEF DESCRIPTION / RESPONSIBILITIES This is an excellent opportunity for a Turkish/English speaking technician familiar with PBX administration. (Major domestic or International manufacturer). High pay plus expenses. Project in Istanbul, Turkey. 1-3 month assignment. Large Fortune 100 company. - Needed immediately!! REQUIRED SKILLS Initial database creation, initial MAC creation, trunk and line configuration, station configuration, trouble shooting, training capabilities a plus. Familiarity with Microsoft NT Server and Client software a big plus! Must be fluent in Turkish and in English. CONTACT: For more information contact: Mr. Dan Gauthier, Tellus Technologies, 4919 Valerie, Bellaire, TX 77401, Tel (713)661-0841, Fax (713) 661-8129 or email dan@telluscom.com. An Equal Opportunity Employer. ------------------------------ From: Jerry Witt <75522.2760@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Job Opportunity: Manager of IT Job in Denver Date: 11 Jun 1997 03:57:52 GMT Organization: Staff Options, Denver, Colorado Leading cellular phone company in Denver seeks Manager of Information Technology to oversee all IT issues and responsibilities supporting the customer service center in Denver. Required skills: CNA or CNE, or strong Novell Netware background, including managing and supervising Network Admin and technicians, telephony responsibilities for voice/data and PBX needs, preferrably AT&T Definity G3 systems. 2 or more years managing IT for over 50 employee customer service center, prefer someone from cellular phone industry. Budgeting, new technology issues, year2000, hardware and software, help desk, configuration management, vendor relations, interdepartmental relations. B.S. required or equivalent experience in Cellular industry. M.S. or MBA preferred. Target salary $70K, more or less depending on experience. Contact JERRY WITT, Technical Recruiter, STAFF OPTIONS, a division of Careers, LTD, 1700 Lincoln St., Ste. 2550, Denver, Colorado, 80203. (303) 832-5200 voice (303) 832-9365 fax. infocltd@careersltd.com or jerrywitt@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #150 ******************************